(PC) Cato v. Director of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al, No. 1:2012cv01331 - Document 36 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: ORDER adopting 34 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS to deny 26 Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 7/17/2015. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 JAMES CATO, JR., Plaintiff, 11 12 v. 13 DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITAITON, et al., 14 Case No. 1:12-cv-01331-LJO-MJS (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITHOUT PREJUDICE Defendants. (ECF No. 34) 15 CASE TO REMAIN OPEN 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. On June 29, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and a recommendation to deny Defendants’ motion for summary judgment without prejudice. (ECF No. 34.) No objections were filed. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Court adopts the findings and recommendation (ECF No. 34), filed 2 June 29, 2015, in full; and 3 4 2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 26) is denied without 5 prejudice to Defendants refilling a properly supported motion within thirty 6 7 8 days of the date of this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill July 17, 2015 Dated: UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 3. 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.