Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00615/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00615-8/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

AUTUAN WILLIAMS, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-0615 DFL GGH P

vs.

PLILER, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

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

seeking relief under 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 General Order No. 262.

On January 9, 2007, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein 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 twenty days. The parties

have filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-

304, 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.

Case 2:03-cv-00615-ALA Document 102 Filed 03/20/07 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed January 9, 2007 are adopted in full;

2. Plaintiff’s April 19, 2006, motion for partial summary judgment is denied;

3. Defendants’ April 14, 2006, motion for partial summary judgment is granted

as to plaintiff’s damages claim challenging the ban on access to non-contact visits and

publications containing frontal nudity; defendants’ motion is denied as to plaintiff’s damages

claim challenging the denial of exercise;

4. Defendants’ May 10, 2006, opposition, construed as a motion for partial

summary judgment as to plaintiff’s Equal Protection claim, is granted as to damages claims;

5. The magistrate judge recommended, in part, that defendants be denied

summary judgment as to plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief concerning the denial of exercise,

contact visits and the May 8, 2002, and December 28, 2002, incidents. This action concerns

conditions of confinement at California State Prison-Sacramento (CSP-Sac). In their objections,

defendants state that because plaintiff is now incarcerated at Calipatria State Prison, his claims

for injunctive relief are moot. Within thirty days of the issuance of this order, defendants may

file a supplemental motion for partial summary judgment on mootness grounds.

DATED: March 19, 2007

/s/ David F. Levi 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/will0615.806

Case 2:03-cv-00615-ALA Document 102 Filed 03/20/07 Page 2 of 2