(PC)Wimberly v. County of Sacramento et al, No. 2:2006cv00289 - Document 30 (E.D. Cal. 2008)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Ralph R. Beistline on 2/1/2008 re 15 Findings and Recommendations; All claims contained in the complaint but for those against dfts Sacramento County, Sacramento Sheriff's Department and Lou Blanas regarding a raciallydisciminatory housing policy are dismissed. (Matson, R)

Download PDF
(PC)Wimberly v. County of Sacramento et al Doc. 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LARRY WIMBERLY, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. CIV S-06-0289 DFL GGH P vs. SACRAMENTO COUNTY, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 ORDER / 16 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 General Order No. 262. 19 On March 22, 2007, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 20 herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections 21 to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has not filed 22 objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 24 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 25 ORDERED that: 26 \\\\\ 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 22, 2007, are adopted in full; and 3 2. All claims contained in the complaint but for those against defendants 4 Sacramento County, Sacramento Sheriff’s Department and Lou Blanas regarding a racially 5 disciminatory housing policy are dismissed. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(b). 6 DATED: 2/1/2008 7 8 9 /s/ Ralph R. Beistline UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE /wimb0289.800 10 11 12 13 14 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.