-GGH (PC) Bryan v. Defense Technology U.S. et al, No. 2:2010cv02241 - Document 59 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 8/16/11 ORDERING that the findings and recommendations filed 2/10/11, are adopted in full; and the motion to dismiss, brought by defendants United States Attorney of Sacramento and United States of America 8 is granted, and these defendants are dismissed with prejudice. (Becknal, R)

Download PDF
-GGH (PC) Bryan v. Defense Technology U.S. et al Doc. 59 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 T. TERREL BRYAN, Plaintiff, 11 vs. 12 13 No. CIV S-10-2241 KJM GGH P DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY U.S., et al., Defendants. 14 ORDER / 15 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 16 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 February 10, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, 20 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 21 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed 22 objections to the findings and recommendations1 and defendants have filed a response. 23 ///// 24 1 25 26 In his objections, plaintiff asks the court to provide to him certain cases he contends he has not been able to obtain from the prison library. (Pl.’s Obj. at 18, ECF 52.) It is not the court’s place to conduct legal research for plaintiff. The court has taken account of the cases plaintiff references in issuing this order. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c) and Local Rule 2 304, the court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the file, 3 the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the 4 proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations filed February 10, 2011, are adopted in 7 full; and 8 9 2. The motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), brought by defendants United States Attorney of Sacramento and United States of America and filed on 10 August 27, 2010 (docket # 8), is granted, and these defendants are dismissed with prejudice. 11 DATED: August 16, 2011. 12 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 /brya2241.805 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.