(PC-G) Montiel v. Yates, et al., No. 1:2011cv02145 - Document 60 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 56 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Regarding Dismissal of Defendant Wynn signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 06/12/2014. Wynn terminated from action.(Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 JESSE J. MONTIEL, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 vs. YATES, et al., 15 Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:11cv02145 LJO DLB PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DISMISSAL OF DEFENDNT WYNN (Document 56) 16 Plaintiff Jesse J. Montiel (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 17 18 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on 19 December 28, 2011. This action is proceeding against Defendants Green, Taher-Pour, Wilson, 20 Das and Wynn for violation of the Eighth Amendment.1 21 22 On May 20, 2014, the Court issued Findings and Recommendations that Defendant Wynn be dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to effectuate service. The Findings and 23 Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections to the 24 25 26 Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within fifteen days. No objections have been filed. 27 1 28 On June 9, 2014, the Court issued Findings and Recommendations to grant the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants Taher-pour and Wilson. The objection period has not yet passed. 1 1 2 3 4 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed May 20, 2014, are ADOPTED in full; 6 and 7 8 9 2. Defendant Wynn is DISMISSED FROM THIS ACTION. IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 11 Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill June 12, 2014 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.