(PC) Allen v. Stanislaus County et al, No. 1:2013cv00012 - Document 41 (E.D. Cal. 2015)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 39 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL; ORDER DENYING 22 , 34 Defendants' Motions to Dismiss and ORDER DIRECTING Defendants to File a Further Response to Complaint Within Thirty (30) Days, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 1/12/2015. (Jessen, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 COLUMBUS ALLEN, JR. 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. STANISLAUS COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:13-cv-00012-AWI-SAB (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION, DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS, AND DIRECTING DEFENDANTS TO FILE A FURTHER RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT WITHIN THIRTY DAYS FROM THE DATE OF SERVICE OF THIS ORDER [ECF Nos. 34, 39] Plaintiff Columbus Allen, Jr. is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 On November 18, 2014, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which 21 was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that Objections to the Findings and 22 Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. No Objections were filed. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de 24 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 25 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on November 18, 2014, is adopted in full; 3 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss is DENIED; and 4 3. Defendants are directed to file a further response to the operative complaint within 5 thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: January 12, 2015 9 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
