(PC) Perez v. Lozano, et al, No. 2:2006cv02090 - Document 38 (E.D. Cal. 2009)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS 30 , in full, signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 2/19/2009. The 16 Motion to Dismiss by defendants - Orrick, B. C. Roszko, E. Sandy, Durfey, and Flete is GRANTED and this case shall proceed ONLY as to defendants who have previously answered. (Marciel, M)

Download PDF
(PC) Perez v. Lozano, et al Doc. 38 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE MANUEL PEREZ, 12 No. 2:06-cv-02090-MCE-GGH P Plaintiff, 13 vs. 14 D.K. SISTO, et al., 15 ORDER Defendants. 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 pursuant to 19 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262. 20 On January 8, 2009, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has filed objections 23 to the findings and recommendations. 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, 2 this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, 3 the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 4 analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 8, 2009, are adopted in full; and 7 2. The motion to dismiss, filed on 3/04/08 (Docket # 16), by defendants Durfey, Flete, 8 Orrick, Roszko, and Sandy is granted, and this case shall proceed only as to the defendants who 9 have previously answered. 10 Dated: February 19, 2009 11 12 13 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.