LONG v. MINER, 2:11-cv-2548 TLN DAD P. (2013)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20130730b84
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jul. 26, 2013
Latest Update: Jul. 26, 2013
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On May 29, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to b
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On May 29, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be..
More
ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On May 29, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed May 29, 2013, are adopted in full;
2. Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 18) is granted in part and denied in part as follows:
a. Defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief against appeal coordinator defendants McLean, Martinez, and Miner is denied;
b. Defendants' motion to dismiss based on the affirmative defense of qualified immunity is denied;
c. Defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's negligence claim is granted; and
d. Defendants McLean, Martinez, and Miner are directed to file an answer to plaintiff's amended complaint within thirty days.
Source: Leagle
