Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-01312/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-01312-10/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 - 09cv1312

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY WAYNE JOHNSON, JR., Civil No. 09cv1312-LAB (POR)

Plaintiff,

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BE

DENIED

[ECF No. 69]

v.

M. GAINS et al.,

Defendants.

On April 8, 2011, Plaintiff Anthony Wayne Johnson, Jr. filed a Motion for Summary

Judgment. (ECF No. 66.) In that motion, Plaintiff argued he is entitled to judgment as a matter of

law on his excessive force claim against Defendants Carpio, Garza, Rascon, Palomera, and Smith

because “[t]he facts are undisputed that Defendants M. Carpio and B. Smith violated Plaintiff’s

rights protected by the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.” (Id.) Shortly thereafter,

Plaintiff filed a Motion for Appointing of Counsel/Motion for Summary Judgment, in which he

moved for summary judgment on the same grounds. (ECF No. 69.) The Court denied Plaintiff’s

Motion for Summary Judgment without prejudice on May 24, 2011. (ECF No. 76.)

On July 15, 2011, the Court issued a Report and Recommendation that Plaintiff’s Motion for

Summary Judgment be denied. (ECF No. 84.) Plaintiff filed an Objection to the Court’s Report and

Recommendation on August 8, 2011. (ECF No. 93.) Defendants did not file a reply to Plaintiff’s

Objection. The Court’s Report and Recommendation Order (ECF No. 84) is currently pending

before the Honorable Larry A. Burns. Based thereon and for the reasons set forth in its July 15,

Case 3:09-cv-01312-LAB-DHB Document 199 Filed 02/16/12 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 - 09cv1312

2011 Report and Recommendation Order, the Court further RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff’s

successive Motion for Summary Judgment be DENIED.

This report and recommendation will be submitted to the United States District Court Judge

assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Any party may file

written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties on or before March 2, 2012. The

document should be captioned “Objections to Report and Recommendation.” Any reply to the

objections shall be served and filed no later than 14 days after being served with the objections.

The parties are further advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the

right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 16, 2012

LOUISA S PORTER

United States Magistrate Judge

cc The Honorable Larry A. Burns

All parties

Case 3:09-cv-01312-LAB-DHB Document 199 Filed 02/16/12 Page 2 of 2