-JFM (PC) Cyprian v. Givens et al, No. 2:2009cv02704 - Document 87 (E.D. Cal. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 1/18/12 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 12/19/11 85 are ADOPTED in full; Defendants' 7/14/11 renewed Motion to Dismiss 71 is GRANTED. Plaintiff's equal protection and due proc ess claims arising out of the alleged issuance of false disciplinary charges are dismissed with leave to amend; Plaintiff's claim of interference with his right to access the courts is dismissed without leave to amend; Plaintiff's Eighth Am endment claim of deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs is dismissed without leave to amend; Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order to file a fourth amended complaint raising only his equal protection and/or due pr ocess claims arising from the alleged issuance of false disciplinary charges; and Defendants are not required to respond to any fourth amended complaint until it is screened by the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-JFM (PC) Cyprian v. Givens et al Doc. 87 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LAWRENCE CYPRIAN, 11 Plaintiff, 12 No. 2:09-cv-2704 JAM JFM (PC) vs. 13 DERRICK GIVENS, 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 Rule 302. 19 On December 19, 2011, 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 fourteen days. Neither 22 party has filed 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 1 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 19, 2011, are adopted in full; 3 2. Defendants’ July 14, 2011 renewed motion to dismiss is granted; 4 3. Plaintiff’s equal protection and due process claims arising out of the alleged 5 6 7 8 9 10 issuance of false disciplinary charges are dismissed with leave to amend; 4. Plaintiff’s claim of interference with his right to access the courts is dismissed without leave to amend; 5. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim of deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs is dismissed without leave to amend; 6. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order to file a fourth 11 amended complaint raising only his equal protection and/or due process claims arising from the 12 alleged issuance of false disciplinary charges; and 13 7. Defendants are not required to respond to any fourth amended complaint until 14 it is screened by the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 15 DATED: January 18, 2012 16 17 /s/ John A. Mendez UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
