(PC) James v. County of Sacramento et al, No. 2:2010cv00664 - Document 44 (E.D. Cal. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 8/6/2012 ADOPTING 43 Findings and Recommendations in full; GRANTING 31 Motion to Dismiss Defendants McGinness and Maness, in their official capacity, from Plaintiff's fourth and fifth claim; GRANTING 31 Motion to Dismiss Defendants Nurse Necoechea and Dr. Sotak from Plaintiff's second claim; GRANTING 31 Motion to Dismiss Defendants McGinness, Maness, Nurse Necoechea, Dr. Sotak and Filer from Plaintiff's third claim; GRANTING 31 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth claims based on state law as barred by the statute of limitations; DIRECTING Defendants to file an Answer to Plaintiff's remaining claims within 30 days. (Michel, G)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) James v. County of Sacramento et al Doc. 44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM JAMES, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, vs. ORDER COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO et al., Defendants. 16 17 No. 2:10-cv-0664 MCE DAD P / 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 Rule 302. 20 On June 11, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 21 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any 22 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither 23 party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 25 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 26 ORDERED that: 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 43) filed June 11, 2012, are adopted in full; 3 2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31) is GRANTED as follows: 4 a. Defendants’ motion to dismiss defendants McGinness and Maness in 5 their official capacity from plaintiff’s fourth and fifth claims is 6 GRANTED; 7 b. Defendants’ motion to dismiss defendants Nurse Necoechea and Dr. 8 Sotak from plaintiff’s second claim is GRANTED; 9 c. Defendants’ motion to dismiss defendants McGinness, Maness, Nurse 10 Necoechea, Dr. Sotak and Filer from plaintiff’s third claim is GRANTED; 11 d. Defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s sixth, seventh, eighth, and 12 ninth claims based on state law as barred by the statute of limitations is 13 GRANTED; and 14 15 16 3. Defendants are directed to file an answer to plaintiff’s remaining claims within thirty days. Dated: August 6, 2012 17 18 19 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
