(PC) Coleman v. Davis et al, No. 2:2015cv01434 - Document 17 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/26/18 ADOPTING 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in full; The First Amendment access to the courts claim against defendants Barnes, Foulk, and Davis is dismissed without leave to amend; and This matter is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for all further pretrial proceedings. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Coleman v. Davis et al Doc. 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 SAAHDI COLEMAN, 11 No. 2:15-cv-1434-KJM-EFB P Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 C. DAVIS, et al., 14 ORDER Defendants. 15 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 16 17 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided 18 by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On December 8, 2017, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 19 20 were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings 21 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the 22 findings and recommendations. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 24 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds the 25 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.1 26 27 28 1 The court notes that the case of Silva v. DiVittorio, 658 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2011), cited by the magistrate judge at page 2, line 11, has been overruled on other grounds as stated in Richey v. Dahne, 807 F.3d 1202, 1209 n.6 (9th Cir. 2015). 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 8, 2017, are adopted in full; 3 2. The First Amendment access to the courts claim against defendants Barnes, Foulk, and 4 5 Davis is dismissed without leave to amend; and 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial 6 proceedings. 7 DATED: September 26, 2018. 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
