Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00197/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00197-3/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

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 Charles Albert Neely is appearing 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 302. On September 2, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and 

Recommendation which was served on the parties and contained notice that objections to the Findings 

and Recommendation were to be filed within thirty days. Defendant filed objections on October 3, 

2016.

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, including Defendant’s objections, 

the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 

analysis.

///

CHARLES ALBERT NEELY,

 Plaintiff,

v.

D. RUFFIN,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-00197-LJO-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION, DENYING 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS, AND 

DIRECTING DEFENDANT TO FILE A FURTHER 

RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND 

AMENDED COMPLAINT

[ECF Nos. 19, 24]

Case 1:15-cv-00197-LJO-SAB Document 26 Filed 10/11/16 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 Recommendation, filed on September 2, 2016, is adopted in full;

2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the second amended complaint is DENIED; and

3. Within thirty days from the date of service of this order, Defendant shall file a further 

response to the second amended complaint. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 11, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00197-LJO-SAB Document 26 Filed 10/11/16 Page 2 of 2