Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00413/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00413-15/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

 Facts asserted by plaintiff in his objections which are not supported by affidavit or other 1

admissible evidence are not properly before the court and will not be considered. See Fed. R.

Civ. P 56(e).

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL DAVENPORT,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0413 MCE KJM P

vs.

R. MCKEAN, et al.,

Defendants. 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 General Order No. 262.

On August 1, 2007, 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 days. Plaintiff

has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

1

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00413-MCE -KJM Document 98 Filed 10/22/07 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

2

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-

304, 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 August 1, 2007, are adopted in full;

2. The October 6, 2006 motion for summary judgment filed by defendants

Barnett, Erlich, Sandefur, Miranda, Schirmer, Cook and Evans is granted;

3. Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment claims are dismissed resulting in the

dismissal of defendants Barnett, Erlich, Sandefur, Miranda, Schirmer, Cook and Evans from this

action;

4. Plaintiff’s October 10, 2006 motion for summary judgment is denied;

5. Plaintiff is ordered to file his pretrial statement within thirty days; and

6. Defendants McKean, Eberle, Mancilla, Oschner, Speers, Braida and Lingerfelt

are ordered to file their pretrial statement within fifteen days of service of plaintiff’s pretrial

statement.

Dated: October 19, 2007

________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00413-MCE -KJM Document 98 Filed 10/22/07 Page 2 of 2