(PC) Arline v. Clark, No. 1:2007cv01097 - Document 48 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 42 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER for this Action to Proceed on Plaintiff's claims Based only on two Specific Instances of Modified Programming, and Dismissing all other Claims signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 06/01/2010. (Flores, E)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Arline v. Clark Doc. 48 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 KENNETH DUANE ARLINE, JR., 11 12 13 Plaintiff, vs. WARDEN KEN CLARK, 14 15 16 17 Defendant. 1:07-cv-01097-LJO-GSA-PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 42) ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO PROCEED ON PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS BASED ONLY ON TWO SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF MODIFIED PROGRAMMING, AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS _____________________________/ Kenneth Duane Arline, Jr. (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this 18 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302. 20 On April 9, 2010, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that 21 this action proceed against defendant Warden Ken Clark for inadequate outdoor exercise under the 22 Eighth Amendment, only with regard to two specific instances of modified programming, one 23 beginning on August 15, 2006, and the other beginning on October 20, 2006, and that all other 24 claims be dismissed. (Doc. 42.) On April 20, 2010, plaintiff filed a notice of non-opposition to the 25 findings and recommendations. (Doc. 44.) 26 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ' 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73- 27 305, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper 2 analysis. 3 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on April 9, 5 2010, are adopted in full; and 6 2. This action now proceeds against defendant Warden Ken Clark for inadequate 7 outdoor exercise under the Eighth Amendment, only with regard to two specific instances of 8 modified programming, one beginning on August 15, 2006, and the other beginning on October 20, 9 2006, and all other claims are dismissed. 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: b9ed48 June 1, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
