(PC) Evans v. Fox et al, No. 2:2016cv01997 - Document 30 (E.D. Cal. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 8/10/2020 ADOPTING the findings and recommendations filed 12/23/2019 in full; DISMISSING Plaintiff's claims against defendants Fox, Zometa, Ballenger, Tabbs, and Does 1-50 without leave to amend ; DISMISSING Plaintiff's First Amendment claims against defendants Wong, Lassiter, and Bjorson without leave to amend; and REFERRING this matter back to the magistrate judge to effectuate service of plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims against defendants Montemayor, Wong, Lassiter, and Bjorson pursuant to the Court's E-Service pilot program for civil rights cases for the Eastern District of California.(Becknal, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Evans v. Fox et al Doc. 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GENE EVANS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:16-cv-1997-JAM-EFB P v. ORDER ROBERT FOX, 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. 20 On December 23, 2019, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not 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 December 23, 2019, are adopted in full; 27 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 2. Plaintiff’s claims against defendants Fox, Zometa, Ballenger, Tabbs, and Does 1-50 are dismissed without leave to amend; 3. Plaintiff’s First Amendment claims against defendants Wong, Lassiter, and Bjorson be dismissed without leave to amend; and 5 4. This matter be referred back to the magistrate judge to effectuate service of plaintiff’s 6 Eighth Amendment claims against defendants Montemayor, Wong, Lassiter, and 7 Bjorson pursuant to the Court’s E-Service pilot program for civil rights cases for the 8 Eastern District of California. 9 10 11 DATED: August 10, 2020 /s/ John A. Mendez____________ _____ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 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.
