Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02902/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02902-3/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

NORMAN IVORY,

Plaintiff,

v.

R. MIRANDA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:12-cv-2902 WBS AC 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 January 15, 2014, 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-one days. Plaintiff has filed 

objections to that portion of the findings and recommendations which recommend granting the 

motion for summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim under the ADA.

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 overrules plaintiff’s objections for the reason that the ADA does not provide for suit against 

pubic official in individual capacity Garcia v. SUNY Health Sciences Center, 280 F.3d 98, 107 

Case 2:12-cv-02902-WBS-AC Document 33 Filed 03/06/14 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

(2d Cir. 2002).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed January 15, 2014, are adopted in full; 

2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 20) is denied in part and granted in part as 

follows:

a) Denied as to plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim;

b) Granted as to plaintiff’s claim under the ADA; and

3. Defendant Miranda is directed to file an answer to plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim 

within thirty days of the date of this order.

Dated: March 5, 2014

/ivor2902.805

Case 2:12-cv-02902-WBS-AC Document 33 Filed 03/06/14 Page 2 of 2