(PC) Lal v. Felker et al, No. 2:2007cv02060 - Document 27 (E.D. Cal. 2009)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 1/20/09 ORDERING that the findings and recommendations 17 are adopted in full; and this action is dismissed as to defendants Woodford, Felker, Dangler, Roche, Gra nnis and McDonald for plaintiff's failure to state a cognizable claim against them. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; see also Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1128 (9th Cir. 2000) (indigent prisoner proceeding without counsel must be given leave to file amended complaint unless the court can rule out any possibility that the plaintiff could state a claim). Defendants TERMINATED. (Becknal, R)

Download PDF
(PC) Lal v. Felker et al Doc. 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 AZHAR LAL, 12 Plaintiff, 13 vs. 14 2:07-cv-2060-GEB-EFB-P T. FELKER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 ORDER / 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 18 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262. 20 On October 28, 2008, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 21 herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections 22 to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fifteen days. Plaintiff has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 25 72-304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the 26 /// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 2 proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 28, 2008, are adopted in full; 5 6 and 2. This action is dismissed as to defendants Woodford, Felker, Dangler, Roche, 7 Grannis and McDonald for plaintiff’s failure to state a cognizable claim against them. 8 See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; see also Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1128 (9th Cir. 2000) (indigent 9 prisoner proceeding without counsel must be given leave to file amended complaint unless the 10 court can rule out any possibility that the plaintiff could state a claim). 11 Dated: January 20, 2009 12 13 14 GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge 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.