(PC) Young v. Smith, No. 2:2015cv00733 - Document 32 (E.D. Cal. 2016)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/30/2016 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 26 are ADOPTED in FULL; Smiley is DISMISSED as a defendant to this action, which proceeds as against Defendants Smith, Andrew, Cuppy and Kumar; and Plaintiff's 14 Motion for Injunction Relief is DENIED. (Reader, L)

Download PDF
(PC) Young v. Smith Doc. 32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 CINDY CE CE YOUNG, formerly known As Christopher Duke Young, Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:15-CV-0733-TLN-CMK-P ORDER v. CHRISTOPHER SMITH, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 19 § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District 20 of California local rules. 21 On February 16, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein 22 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections 23 within a specified time. (ECF No. 26.) Plaintiff filed timely objections to the findings and 24 recommendations. (ECF No. 28.) 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304(f), this 26 Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 27 Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 28 analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed February 12, 2016 (ECF No. 26), are adopted 3 4 5 6 in full; 2. Smiley is dismissed as a defendant to this action, which proceeds as against Defendants Smith, Andrews, Cuppy, and Kumar; and 3. Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 14) is denied. 7 8 Dated: March 30, 2016 9 10 11 Troy L. Nunley 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.