Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00203/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00203-12/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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CHARLES G. REECE, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

D.K. SISTO, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:10-cv-203-JAM-EFB P 

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 Rule 302. 

 On March 1, 2016, 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 fourteen days. 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 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 2:10-cv-00203-JAM-EFB Document 64 Filed 04/01/16 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

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 1, 2016, are adopted in full; 

 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss is denied as to plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim; 

3. Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted as to plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment 

claim; and 

4. Defendants’ motion that plaintiff be deemed a vexatious litigant and be required to post 

a security is denied without prejudice. 

 So ordered 

DATED: March 31, 2016 

 /s/ John A. Mendez_______________________ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

Case 2:10-cv-00203-JAM-EFB Document 64 Filed 04/01/16 Page 2 of 2