Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00006/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00006-36/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HERMAN D. SHEAD,

Plaintiff,

v.

C/O VANG,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:09-cv-00006-AWI-SKO (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING 

MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT ON STATE LAW CLAIMS, 

AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE TO SCHEDULE 

FOR TRIAL 

(Docs. 97 and 125)

Plaintiff Herman D. Shead (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 5, 2009. This 

action for damages is proceeding against Defendant Vang (“Defendant”) for excessive force, in 

violation of the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and the Court has 

supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law tort claims.1

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 15, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and 

Recommendations recommending Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment be granted. 

On October 30, 2015, Plaintiff filed a timely Objection. Local Rule 304(b). Plaintiff did not raise 

 

1

Plaintiff’s tort claims may include assault, battery, and/or negligence. (Doc. 1, Comp., pp. 9-10; Doc. 18, Order, p. 

2:9-11.) 

Case 1:09-cv-00006-AWI-SKO Document 128 Filed 11/05/15 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

any new arguments or submit any new evidence and therefore, it is unnecessary for Defendant to 

file a response. Local Rule 304(d).

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the 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 on October 15, 2015, is adopted in full;

2. Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Plaintiff’s state law tort 

claims, filed on September 30, 2013, is GRANTED;

3. This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge to schedule for jury trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 4, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-00006-AWI-SKO Document 128 Filed 11/05/15 Page 2 of 2