(PC) Smith v. Rodriguez et al, No. 2:2013cv02192 - Document 54 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/5/2015 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 36 are ADOPTED in FULL; and the motion to dismiss 20 filed by defendants Rodriguez and Singh is DENIED. (Reader, L)

Download PDF
(PC) Smith v. Rodriguez et al Doc. 54 1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 EARL D. SMITH, 7 Plaintiff, 8 9 No. 2:13-cv-2192 JAM AC P v. ORDER R. RODRIGUEZ, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 13 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 14 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 15 On December 23, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 16 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 17 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. ECF No. 36. Neither 18 party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 19 20 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 21 ORDERED that: 22 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 23, 2014, are adopted in full; and 23 2. The motion to dismiss, ECF No. 20, filed by defendants Rodriguez and Singh is 24 denied. 25 DATED: March 5, 2015 26 /s/ John A. Mendez_______________________ 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com

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.