(PC) Matthews v. Sacramento County Sheriff's Department, No. 2:2005cv00437 - Document 12 (E.D. Cal. 2005)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/31/05 ORDERING that the claims against dft Sacramento County Sheriff's Department contained in the amended complaint 8 are DISMISSED. ***Civil Case Terminated. CASE CLOSED. (Duong, D)

Download PDF
(PC) Matthews v. Sacramento County Sheriff's Department Case 2:05-cv-00437-LKK-GGH Doc. 12 Document 12 Filed 09/01/2005 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TOMMY LEE MATTHEWS, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. CIV S-05-0437 LKK GGH P vs. SACRAMENTO COUNTY, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 ORDER / 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 17 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 18 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262. 19 On May 25, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the 21 findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has not filed 22 objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 24 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 25 ORDERED that: 26 \\\\\ 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:05-cv-00437-LKK-GGH Document 12 Filed 09/01/2005 Page 2 of 2 1 1. The findings and recommendations filed May 25, 2005, are adopted in full; and 2 2. The claims against defendant Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department 3 contained in the amended complaint filed April 21, 2005, are dismissed. 4 DATED: August 31, 2005. 5 6 7 /s/Lawrence K. Karlton UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE /matt0437.800 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.