-KJN (TEMP)(PC) Smith v. State of California et al, No. 2:2005cv01257 - Document 124 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 6/7/2011 ADOPTING 113 Findings and Recommendations in full. Dft's 95 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. Pltf's remaining Eighth Amendment claims against dft Runnels are DISMISSED. Pltf to file an amended pretrial statement concerning his remaining equal protection claims within 21 days and dft Runnels to file an amended pretrial statement within 21 days of service of Pltf's pretrial statement. (Zignago, K.)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-KJN (TEMP)(PC) Smith v. State of California et al Doc. 124 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL LENOIR SMITH, 11 12 13 14 Plaintiff, vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants. 15 16 No. 2:05-cv-1257 GEB KJN (TEMP) P ORDER / Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 17 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 18 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On February 16, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 20 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any 21 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. 22 Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 24 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 25 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 26 proper analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed February 16, 2011, are adopted in 3 full; 4 2. Defendant’s June 28, 2010 motion for summary judgment is granted; 5 3. Plaintiff’s remaining Eighth Amendment claims against defendant Runnels are 6 dismissed; and 7 4. Plaintiff is ordered to file an amended pretrial statement concerning his 8 remaining equal protection claims within twenty-one days of this order, and defendant Runnels is 9 ordered to file an amended pretrial statement within twenty-one days of service of plaintiff’s 10 11 pretrial statement. Dated: June 7, 2011 12 13 14 GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.
