(PC) Hawkins v. State of California et al, No. 1:2009cv01705 - Document 53 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS And Denying Defendant Bacher's Motion To Dismiss (ECF Nos. 28 , 45 ), signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 2/5/2014. (Fahrney, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 LEROY HAWKINS, JR., 13 Plaintiff, 14 15 Case No. 1:09-cv-01705-LJO-MJS (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING DEFENDANT BACHER’S MOTION TO DISMISS v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., ECF Nos. 28, 45 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff Leroy Hawkins (“Plaintiff”), a California state prisoner, filed this civil rights 19 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on September 28, 2009. The matter was referred to a United 20 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On August 15, 2013, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and Recommendations, 22 recommending that Defendant Bacher’s motion to dismiss be denied. (ECF No. 45.) Defendant 23 Bacher has filed objections. (ECF No. 49.) 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c) and Local Rule 304, this 2 Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 3 Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 4 analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed August 15, 2013, are adopted in full; 7 2. Defendant Bacher’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 28) is DENIED, without prejudice; and 8 9 3. Complaint within thirty days of entry of this order. 10 11 12 13 Defendant Bacher should file a response to Plaintiff’s Second Amended 4. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill February 5, 2014 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 5. 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.