Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00503/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00503-13/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DIJON KINNEY,

 Plaintiff,

v.

P.D. BRAZELTON, et al., 

 Defendants.

Case No. 1:14-cv-00503-AWI-MJS (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(ECF No. 65)

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(ECF No. 37)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

STRIKE

(ECF No. 47)

ORDER STRIKING ECF Nos. 44 AND 45

CASE TO REMAIN OPEN

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 

rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds against 

Defendant Flores on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims for inadequate medical care 

and cruel and unusual punishment. The matter was referred to a United States 

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of California. 

Case 1:14-cv-00503-AWI-MJS Document 68 Filed 09/23/16 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

On August 18, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations

to deny Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and to grant Defendant’s motion to 

strike Plaintiff’s unauthorized surreplies. (ECF No. 65.) Defendant filed objections. (ECF 

No. 67.) Plaintiff filed no response. 

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. The matters raised by Defendant’s objections 

were addressed by the Magistrate Judge. The objections do not raise an issue of fact or 

law under the findings and recommendations. 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 Court adopts the August 18, 2016 findings and recommendations

(ECF No. 65) in full;

2. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 37) is DENIED; 

3. Defendant’s motion to strike (ECF No. 47) is GRANTED; and

4. Plaintiff’s unauthorized surreply and objections (ECF Nos. 44 and 45) are 

STRICKEN.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 22, 2016 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00503-AWI-MJS Document 68 Filed 09/23/16 Page 2 of 2