Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00075/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00075-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

U N ITED STATES DISTRICT COU RT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IRVING G. HUMPHREY,

Plaintiff,

v.

JAMES A. YATES, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00075-LJO-DLB PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING

CERTAIN CLAIMS

(Doc. 14)

Plaintiff Irving G. Humphrey (“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 October 28, 2009, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein

which was served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objection to the

Findings and Recommendations was to be filed within thirty days. Plaintiff filed an Objection to the

Findings and Recommendations on November 13, 2009.

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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed October 28, 2009, is adopted in full;

2. Defendants Cate and Wardlow are dismissed from this action for failure to state a

claim upon which relief may be granted;

1

Case 1:09-cv-00075-LJO-JLT Document 21 Filed 03/22/10 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

3. Plaintiff’s Equal Protection and state law claims are dismissed for failure to state a

claim upon which relief may be granted; and

4. This action proceed against Defendant James A. Yates for violation of the Eighth

Amendment; and

5. Defendant Yates is granted thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order in

which to file a response to Plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed June 1, 2009.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 22, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 1:09-cv-00075-LJO-JLT Document 21 Filed 03/22/10 Page 2 of 2