Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00538/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00538-13/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Tracy Taylor is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On December 24, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations 

regarding the parties’ motions for summary judgment. (ECF No. 72.) The Findings and 

Recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that objections were to be filed 

within thirty days. The thirty day time frame has passed and no objections were filed. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the 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.

///

///

///

TRACY TAYLOR,

 Plaintiff,

v.

SHAYE O’HANNESON, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:11-cv-00538-LJO-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL, DENYING 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND DENYING 

DEFENDANTS’ CROSS-MOTION FOR 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

[ECF Nos. 53, 61, 71, 72]

Case 1:11-cv-00538-SAB Document 73 Filed 02/24/15 Page 1 of 2
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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on December 24, 2014, is adopted in full; 

and

2. Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED;

3. Defendants’ motion to strike Plaintiff’s surreply is GRANTED;

4. Defendants’ motion to strike Plaintiff’s statement of undisputed facts in support of his 

motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED; and

5. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 24, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00538-SAB Document 73 Filed 02/24/15 Page 2 of 2