Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00809/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00809-23/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY NGUYEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. D. BITER,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:11-cv-00809-AWI-SKO PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS,

DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO 

STRIKE, DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

TO STRIKE, AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR SANCTIONS 

(Docs. 79, 80, 88, 90, 91, and 94 )

ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANT TO 

FILE ANSWER WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

Plaintiff Anthony Nguyen (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on May 18, 2011. This action 

is proceeding against Defendant Biter (“Defendant”) for violation of the Eighth Amendment of the 

United States Constitution.

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 October 16, 2013, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and 

Recommendations which was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that 

Objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within ten days. No Objections 

were filed. 

///

Case 1:11-cv-00809-AWI-SKO Document 95 Filed 12/04/13 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

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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on October 16, 2013, is adopted in full;

2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, filed on March 18, 2013, 

is DENIED;

3. Defendant’s motion to strike Plaintiff’s surreply, filed on May 21, 2013, is

DENIED as moot;

4. Plaintiff’s motion to strike Defendant’s reply, filed on May 30, 2013, is DENIED;

5. Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions, filed on July 5, 2013, is DENIED; and

6. Defendant shall file an answer within thirty (30) days from the date of service of 

this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 3, 2013 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00809-AWI-SKO Document 95 Filed 12/04/13 Page 2 of 2