(PC) Matthews v. Holland, No. 1:2014cv01959 - Document 65 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/26/18 ADOPTING 63 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DENYING 46 Motion for Judgment on the pleadings. (Kaminski, H)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Matthews v. Holland Doc. 65 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 IVAN LEE MATTHEWS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 KIM HOLLAND, 15 No. 1:14-cv-1959 KJM DB P ORDER Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided 19 by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 31, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 21 served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections to 23 the findings and recommendations. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed 27 the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 28 the proper analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed July 31, 2018 (ECF No. 63) are adopted in 3 full; 4 2. Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (ECF No. 63) is denied; and 5 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial 6 proceedings. 7 DATED: September 26, 2018. 8 9 UNITED STATES 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.
