-KJN (TEMP)(PS) Carlsson v. McBrien, No. 2:2010cv00774 - Document 35 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 2/10/11 ORDERING 24 Findings and Recommendations are adopted in full; 19 Motion to Dismiss is granted in part and denied in part; Plaintiff's 1983 claims against defendant in his official capacit y and for declaratory relief are dismissed with prejudice; Plaintiff's claims against defendant in his individual capacity under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1988 are dismissed w/out prejudice, with leave to amend; The motion to dismiss as to the state law claim is denied; and Plaintiff has thirty days from the entry of this order in which to file an amended complaint.(Matson, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-KJN (TEMP)(PS) Carlsson v. McBrien Doc. 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ULF CARLSSON Plaintiff, 11 12 13 14 vs. PETER J. McBRIEN Defendant. ORDER / 15 16 No. CIV S-10-0774 FCD KJN (TEMP) P Plaintiff has filed this civil rights action pro se seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. 17 § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 18 § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262. 19 On December 21, 2010, 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 Defendants have 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 25 entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and 26 by proper analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 21, 2010 are adopted in 3 full; 4 2. The motion to dismiss (Docket No. 19) is granted in part and denied in part. 5 3. Plaintiff’s § 1983 claims against defendant in his official capacity and for 6 7 8 9 10 declaratory relief are dismissed with prejudice. 4. Plaintiff’s claims against defendant in his individual capacity under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988 are dismissed without prejudice, with leave to amend. 5. The motion to dismiss as to the state law claim is denied. 6. Plaintiff has thirty days from the entry of this order in which to file an 11 amended complaint. 12 DATED: February 10, 2011. 13 14 _______________________________________ FRANK C. DAMRELL, 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.
