(PC) Low v. Stanton et al, No. 2:2005cv02211 - Document 213 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 2/22/10 ORDERING that the findings and recommendations filed 1/14/10, are adopted in full; and Defendant Glenn's 3/18/09 motion for summary judgment 195 is denied. (Becknal, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Low v. Stanton et al Doc. 213 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TONY RICHARD LOW, 11 12 13 14 15 16 Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-2211 MCE DAD P vs. GARY R. STANTON, et al., Defendants. ORDER / Plaintiff, a former 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 January 14, 2010, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 20 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any 21 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Neither 22 party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the findings and 24 recommendations was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility 25 to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), 26 service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 3 ORDERED that: 4 5 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 14, 2010, are adopted in full; and 6 7 8 2. Defendant Glenn’s March 18, 2009 motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 195) is denied. Dated: February 22, 2010 9 10 11 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
