(PC) Coleman v. Adams, et al., No. 1:2006cv00836 - Document 51 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 50 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DENYING 36 Motion to Dismiss signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 8/5/2010. (Bradley, A)

Download PDF
(PC) Coleman v. Adams, et al. Doc. 51 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 SAAHDI COLEMAN, 10 CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00836-AWI-SKO PC Plaintiff, 11 ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATIONS FINDINGS AND v. ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS 12 DERRAL G. ADAMS, et al., (Doc. 50) 13 Defendants. / 14 15 Plaintiff Saahdi Coleman (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 16 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 17 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 18 On June 22, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendations which 19 recommended that Defendants’ motion to dismiss be denied. The Findings and Recommendations 20 were served on all parties and contained notice that any objections to the Findings and 21 Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30) days of the date on which the Findings and 22 Recommendations were served. 23 Recommendations. Neither party has filed objections to the Findings and 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 305, this Court 25 has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court 26 finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 27 /// 28 /// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that: 2 1. The June 22, 2010 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED in full; and 3 2. Defendants’ October 9, 2009 motion to dismiss is DENIED. 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: 0m8i78 August 5, 2010 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 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.