Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-00032/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-00032-7/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

GEORGE SHELDON JERCICH,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, 

et al.,

Defendants.

 Case No. 1:18-cv-00032-LJO-EPG (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(ECF Nos. 55, 56, 57, 59)

Plaintiff, George Sheldon Jercich, is a former 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 December 23, 2019, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and 

recommendations recommending that that the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Smith be 

granted and that the motion for reconsideration filed by Plaintiff be denied. (ECF No. 59.) 

Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and

recommendations within twenty-one days. Plaintiff has not filed any objections and the time to do 

so has passed. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), this court has conducted a 

Case 1:18-cv-00032-NONE-EPG Document 60 Filed 01/24/20 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

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, the Court hereby orders that: 

1. The findings and recommendations entered December 23, 2019 (ECF No. 59) are

adopted in full;

2. Defendant Smith’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 56) is GRANTED;

3. Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 57) is DENIED; 

4. Plaintiff’s Fourth Amended Complaint (ECF No. 55) is DISMISSED WITH 

PREJUDICE.

5. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close this case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 24, 2020 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:18-cv-00032-NONE-EPG Document 60 Filed 01/24/20 Page 2 of 2