Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01123/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01123-1/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERIC LEE HACKETT, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

CITY OF FRESNO, FRESNO COUNTY,

Defendants.

 /

1:06-cv-01123-OWW-SMS-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 7)

ORDER DISMISSING ENTIRE ACTION

ORDER DENYING PENDING MOTIONS

AS MOOT

Eric Lee Hackett (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding

pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil rights action

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the

instant action on August 21, 2006, naming the City of Fresno and

Fresno County Parole as Defendants. 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 September 20, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings

and Recommendations herein which were 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 (30)

days. On October 2, 2006, Plaintiff filed objections to the

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation.

Case 1:06-cv-01123-OWW -SMS Document 14 Filed 11/16/06 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

27

28

2

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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed September 20,

2006, are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. This action is DISMISSED in its entirety; and,

3. Any pending motions are DENIED as MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 15, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01123-OWW -SMS Document 14 Filed 11/16/06 Page 2 of 2