(PC) Reece v. Sisto et al, No. 2:2010cv00203 - Document 49 (E.D. Cal. 2014)
Court Description: ORDER adopting in full 47 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/14/14. Defendants' 22 motion to dismiss is granted in that plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim is dismissed with leave to amend, and that claims based on conditions existing before January 2006 are dismissed without leave to amend, as barred by the statute of limitations. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days of the filing date of this order. If plaintiff chooses not to file an amended complaint and instead, to proceed solely on his Fourteenth Amendment claim, then defendants are required to file an answer within 45 days of the filing date of this order. (Kastilahn, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Reece v. Sisto et al Doc. 49 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHARLES G. REECE, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:10-cv-0203-JAM-EFB P v. ORDER D.K. SISTO, et al., 15 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 Rule 302. On August 14, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 24 25 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 26 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 27 proper analysis. 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed August 14, 2014, are adopted in full; and 3 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 22) is granted in that plaintiff’s Eighth 4 Amendment claim is dismissed with leave to amend, and that claims based on 5 conditions existing before January 2006 are dismissed without leave to amend, as 6 barred by the statute of limitations; 7 8 9 3. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies in his Eighth Amendment claim, within thirty days of the filing date of this order; and 4. If plaintiff chooses not to file an amended complaint and instead, to proceed solely on 10 his Fourteenth Amendment claim, then defendants are required to file an answer within 11 45 days of the filing date of this order. 12 DATED: November 14, 2014 13 /s/ John A. Mendez_______________________ 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.
