Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00430/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00430-9/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

JUAN MONTENEGRO,

Plaintiff,

v.

DAVID MOORE, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:19-cv-00430-DAD-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT

(Doc. Nos. 32, 33)

Plaintiff Juan Montenegro is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis 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 January 23, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, 

recommending that plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment be denied without prejudice. (Doc. 

No. 33.) As the magistrate judge noted, discovery only commenced in this action on December 4, 

2019, and defendants have not been provided the opportunity to complete discovery and obtain 

information necessary to oppose plaintiff’s motion. (Id.) Moreover, plaintiff’s motion does not

comply with Local Rule 260(a), as it fails to include a Statement of Undisputed Facts 

enumerating the evidence on which plaintiff is relying for his motion for summary judgment. 

(See Doc. No. 32.) The findings and recommendations were served on both parties and contained 

Case 1:19-cv-00430-DAD-SAB Document 36 Filed 04/21/20 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

notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days of service. (Id.) No 

objections have been filed and the time to do so has now passed. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 

court concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper 

analysis.

Accordingly:

1. The findings and recommendations filed on January 23, 2020 (Doc. No. 33) are 

adopted in full; 

2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment filed on January 21, 2020 (Doc. No. 32) 

is denied without prejudice; and

3. The matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further 

proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 21, 2020 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00430-DAD-SAB Document 36 Filed 04/21/20 Page 2 of 2