Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00126/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00126-26/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 Harvey Curtis Baker (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se 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 August 1, 2016, the magistrate judge filed a findings and 

recommendation recommending that Defendant S. Moore’s motion for summary judgment in this 

matter be denied. (ECF No. 110.) The findings and recommendation was served on the parties with 

notice that any objections were to be filed within thirty (30) days of service. Over thirty (30) days 

have passed, and no objections have been 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 

recommendation to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

HARVEY CURTIS BAKER,

 Plaintiff,

v.

S. MOORE,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:12-cv-00126-LJO-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION, DENYING 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT, AND REFERRING CASE BACK TO 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

(ECF Nos. 88, 110)

Case 1:12-cv-00126-SAB Document 112 Filed 09/16/16 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 August 1, 2016, is adopted in full; 

2. Defendant S. Moore’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED; 

3. This matter shall proceed to a jury trial on Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant S. Moore 

for failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and 

4. This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 15, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00126-SAB Document 112 Filed 09/16/16 Page 2 of 2