(PC) Florence v. Nangalama et al, No. 2:2011cv03119 - Document 52 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 8/15/14 ORDERING that the findings and recommendations filed 7/22/14, are adopted in full; Defendants' motion to dismiss 34 is granted as to claims nine and ten against defendant McDowell, and denied as to plaintiff's retaliation claim against defendant Lopez; and Defendants Lopez, Baider and Nangalama are directed to file a responsive pleading within fourteen days from the date of this order. (Becknal, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAVID FLORENCE, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:11-cv-3119 GEB KJN P v. ORDER A.W. NANGALAMA, 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 July 22, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 20 21 were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 22 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 file, the 26 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 27 analysis. 28 ///// 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed July 22, 2014, are adopted in full; 3 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 34) is granted as to claims nine and ten 4 against defendant McDowell, and denied as to plaintiff’s retaliation claim against defendant 5 Lopez; and 6 3. Defendants Lopez, Baider and Nangalama are directed to file a responsive pleading 7 within fourteen days from the date of this order. 8 Dated: August 15, 2014 9 10 11 12 13 14 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.