Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-02454/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-02454-7/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

 The court amends the Order, filed on September 27, 2006, to afford plaintiff the benefit

1

of the mailbox rule with respect to the filing of his objections.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY GORDON,

Plaintiff, 2:02-cv-2454-GEB-GGH-P

vs.

ANNA M. RAMIREZ-PALMER, et al., 

Defendants. AMENDED ORDER1

 /

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 General Order No. 262.

On August 11, 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

September 12, 2006, plaintiff was granted an extension of time to file objections until September

Case 2:02-cv-02454-GEB-GGH Document 109 Filed 10/03/06 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

 Plaintiff includes as exhibits requests with regard to discovery that were not filed in this

2

court until January 23, 2006, notwithstanding plaintiff’s representation in his objections that they

were filed on July 4, 2005. Nor does the docket show the wholly defective motion to compel he

includes as an exhibit to his objections, as filed at all, either in July of 2005, or in January of

2006. 

2

20, 2006. Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

2

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed August 11, 2006, are adopted in full;

and 

2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, filed on December 30, 2005, is

granted and judgment is to be entered for defendants.

Dated: October 3, 2006

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:02-cv-02454-GEB-GGH Document 109 Filed 10/03/06 Page 2 of 2