(PC) Garcia v. Folks et al, No. 2:2014cv02378 - Document 104 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 3/29/18 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 1/29/18 96 are ADOPTED in full; Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 80 is DENIED on the issue of exhaustion and DENIED without prejudice on the merits; Defendants' Motion to Strike the sur-reply 95 is GRANTED; and This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for the appointment of counsel for Plaintiff and to conduct an evidentiary hearing on the exhaustion issues identified in the January 29 Findings and Recommendations. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Garcia v. Folks et al Doc. 104 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RAUL GARCIA, 12 No. 2:14-cv-2378 JAM DB P Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 F. FOLKS, et al., 15 ORDER 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 January 29, 2018, 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. Neither party has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 24 25 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 26 ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 29, 2018 (ECF No. 96) are adopted in 27 28 full; 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 80) is denied on the issue of exhaustion and denied without prejudice on the merits; 3 3. Defendants’ motion to strike the sur-reply (ECF No. 95) is granted; and 4 4. This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for the appointment of counsel for 5 plaintiff and to conduct an evidentiary hearing on the exhaustion issues identified in the January 6 29 findings and recommendations. 7 DATED: March 29, 2018 8 /s/ John A. Mendez________________________ 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 DLB:9/garc2378.803 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.
