Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06106/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06106-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN BERNARD BROOKS,

Plaintiff,

v.

RAYMOND ANDREWS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:03-cv-06106-LJO-SMS PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS, AND GRANTING

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT

(Docs. 125 and 132)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF THE COURT

TO ENTER JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANTS

AND AGAINST PLAINTIFF

Plaintiff Steven Bernard Brooks (“plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in

forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal

Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), which provides a remedy for violation of civil rights by

federal actors. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On January 10, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein

which was served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. On February 14, 2007, plaintiff

filed an Objection. Defendants did not file a response. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, 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 1:03-cv-06106-LJO -SMS Document 135 Filed 03/05/07 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 January 10, 2007, is adopted in full;

2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, filed August 29, 2006, is GRANTED,

thus concluding this action in its entirety; and

3. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment for defendants and against plaintiff.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 2, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-06106-LJO -SMS Document 135 Filed 03/05/07 Page 2 of 2