(PC) Siegrist v. California Department of Corrections et al, No. 1:2010cv01976 - Document 55 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 53 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Granting Defendant Dutra's 40 Motion for Summary Judgment, Dismissing Dutra without Prejudice, and Directing Defendant Stringer to File Response to Second Amended Complaint signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 07/22/2015. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VANALBERT SIEGRIST, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. J.J. JOHNSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Case No.: 1:10-cv-01976-LJO-SAB (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING DEFENDANT DUTRA’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDMENT, DISMISSING DUTRA WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AND DIRECTING DEFENDANT STRINGER TO FILE RESPONSE TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT [ECF Nos. 32, 40, 53] Plaintiff Vanalbert Siegrist is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 17 18 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 20 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On June 4, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and 21 Recommendation which was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that 22 objections to the Findings and Recommendation were to be filed within thirty days. No objections 23 were filed. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de 25 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 26 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 27 /// 28 /// 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on June 4, 2015, is adopted in full; 3 2. Defendant Dutra’s December 15, 2014, motion for summary judgment is DENIED as MOOT; 4 5 3. Defendant Dutra’s February 25, 2015, motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; 6 4. Defendant Dutra is DISMISSED from the action without prejudice; and 7 5. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Defendant Stringer shall file a response to the second amended complaint. 8 9 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill July 22, 2015 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.