Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01898/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01898-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CHARLES T. DAVIS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

D.L. RUNNELS, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:05-cv-1898-JAM-EFB P 

ORDER 

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 29, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and 

recommendations, which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that 

any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. 

Neither party filed objections. 

On September 5, 2013, the undersigned adopted the findings and recommendations. ECF 

No. 98. Thereafter, plaintiff filed untimely objections to the findings and recommendations. ECF 

No. 102. He now requests reconsideration of the undersigned’s September 5, 2013 order in light 

of his belated objections. ECF No. 104. 

 In an abundance of caution, the court will grant plaintiff’s request to consider his 

objections. Accordingly, the September 5, 2013 order adopting the findings and 

recommendations is hereby reconsidered in light of the plaintiff’s recently submitted objections. 

Case 2:05-cv-01898-JAM-EFB Document 107 Filed 10/23/13 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2

However, nothing presented in plaintiff’s objections warrants vacating that order. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 

court has conducted a de novo review of this case, including plaintiff’s objections to the findings 

and recommendations of the magistrate judge. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court 

again finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 

analysis. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Order entered on September 5, 

2013 (ECF No. 98) adopting in full the findings and recommendations and granting defendants’ 

motion for summary judgment in part is CONFIRMED. The Clerk of the Court shall terminate 

plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 104). 

DATED: October 23, 2013 

 

 /s/ John A. Mendez_______________________ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

 

Case 2:05-cv-01898-JAM-EFB Document 107 Filed 10/23/13 Page 2 of 2