Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05437/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05437-13/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL L. HUGHES,

Plaintiff,

vs.

S. SHERMAN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-05437-OWW-SMS-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 46)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 34)

ORDER CONCLUDING ENTIRE ACTION

Plaintiff, Michael L. Hughes (“plaintiff”), is a state

prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was

referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On July 10, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which

contained notice to the parties that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30)

days. On August 15, 2007, plaintiff filed a motion to extend

time. On August 23, 2007, the court granted plaintiff sixty (60)

days within which to respond. On October 11, 2007, plaintiff

Case 1:04-cv-05437-OWW -SMS Document 50 Filed 12/03/07 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

filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

Recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, this Court has conducted a

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to

be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed July 10, 2007,

are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, filed January

17, 2007, is GRANTED; and,

3. This action is therefore CONCLUDED in its entirety.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 1, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05437-OWW -SMS Document 50 Filed 12/03/07 Page 2 of 2