Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00241/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00241-6/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

TERRY JAY MEYERS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-0241 LKK GGH P

vs.

SHERIFF JIM POPE, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a civil detainee, 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 July 6, 2006, 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. On July 27, 2006, the

plaintiff was granted, an extension of time in which to file his objections. Plaintiff has 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

/////

Case 2:03-cv-00241-AK Document 72 Filed 09/29/06 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

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 July 6, 2006, are adopted in full;

2. Defendants’ September 9, 2005, motion for summary judgment is granted:

a.) Granted as to plaintiff’s inapposite Fifth Amendment claims for

violations of the Double Jeopardy and Ex Post Facto Clauses;

b.) Granted with respect to any claims made pursuant to the First, Sixth

and Eighth Amendments;

c.) Granted as to plaintiff’s claims of violations of his rights under the

substantive due process clause under the Fourteenth Amendment;

d.) Granted on the basis of qualified immunity; and

3. Judgment is to be entered for defendants.

DATED: September 29, 2006.

Case 2:03-cv-00241-AK Document 72 Filed 09/29/06 Page 2 of 2