(PC) Thompson v. Vidurria et al, No. 1:2014cv01896 - Document 47 (E.D. Cal. 2015)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 31 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Denying Defendant Martinez's 14 Motion to Dismiss signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 11/16/2015. (Flores, E)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TYRONE THOMPSON, 12 13 14 Plaintiff, v. VIDURRIA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:14-cv-01896-LJO-SAB (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING DEFENDANT MARTINEZ’S MOTION TO DISMISS [ECF No. 31] Plaintiff Tyrone Thompson is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 1, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which 20 recommended denial of Defendant Martinez’s motion to dismiss. The Findings and 21 Recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that objections to the Findings and 22 Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. Defendant filed objections on October 1, 2015. 23 (ECF No. 33.) 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de 25 novo review of this case. The Court understands Defendant’s argument that mere involvement in the 26 grievance process typically does not amount to personal participation for a past constitutional 27 violation; however, in this instance, at the pleading stage, the Court finds that Plaintiff has “alleged 28 more than the mere denial of his inmate grievance to demonstrate an “affirmative link” between 1 1 Martinez’s conduct and the alleged constitutional violation by Defendant Vidaurri.” (ECF No. 6, 2 Findings and Recommendations 6:26-7:1-3.) Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including 3 Defendant’s objections, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the 4 record and by proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on September 1, 2015, are adopted in full; 2. Defendant Martinez’s motion to dismiss is DENIED. 7 8 and 9 10 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill November 16, 2015 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
