Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02881/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02881-3/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LUIS REYNALDO JOHNSON,

Plaintiff, No. 2:11-cv-2881 MCE DAD P

vs.

D. CLAYS et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On April 17, 2012, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate

judge’s screening order filed March 30, 2012, finding that plaintiff’s complaint appeared to state

a cognizable claim against defendants Baker and Speer for retaliation but failed to state a

cognizable claim against defendant Clays for improperly confiscating his television and against

defendants Harrington, Knipp, and White for their supervisory conduct and the way in which

they handled his inmate appeals. Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge’s orders

shall be upheld unless “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” Upon review of the entire file, the

court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate judge’s ruling was clearly erroneous or

contrary to law.

/////

1

Case 2:11-cv-02881-TLN-DAD Document 23 Filed 08/22/12 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

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion fo reconsideration (ECF No. 16) is granted;

2. Upon reconsideration, the order of the magistrate judge filed March 30, 2012,

is affirmed. 

Dated: August 21, 2012

________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 2:11-cv-02881-TLN-DAD Document 23 Filed 08/22/12 Page 2 of 2