(PC) Wright v. Clark et al, No. 1:2007cv00462 - Document 55 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 53 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER Denying 47 Motion to Dismiss; ORDER Referring Action signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 02/09/2010. (Flores, E)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Wright v. Clark et al Doc. 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) v. ) ) KEN CLARK, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) RAYMOND WRIGHT, 1:07-CV-0462 AWI YNP SMS ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS ORDER REFERRING ACTION (Documents #47 & #53) 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner who is a proceeding with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 19 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On October 29, 2009, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and Recommendations, 21 recommending that Defendants’ motion to dismiss be denied. The Findings and 22 Recommendations gave notice that any party could file objections within thirty days. No party 23 has filed objections. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)C) this court has conducted a 25 de novo review of this case. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 26 (9th Cir. 1983). Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the Findings and 27 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 28 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. 3 The Findings and Recommendations filed October 29, 2009, are ADOPTED IN FULL; 4 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss is DENIED; and 5 3. This action is referred to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: 0m8i78 February 9, 2010 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
