Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01754/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01754-5/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

JUAN SOUSA,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

C. WEGMAN, et al., 

 Defendants.

Case No. 1:11-cv-01754-LJO-MJS (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS (1) GRANTING 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE 

SURREPLY, and (2) DENYING 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

(ECF Nos. 24, 29, 32)

CASE TO REMAIN OPEN

Plaintiff Juan Sousa is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action filed October 21, 2011 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 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

On January 29, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations

that Defendant’s Motion to Strike Plaintiff‟s Surreply be granted and Defendant’s Motion to 

Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint be denied. (F&R, ECF No. 32, at 12:4-6.) Any 

objection to the Findings and Recommendations was due by February 18, 2014. (Id., at 

12:9-10.) The February 18th deadline passed without Plaintiff filing objections or otherwise 

Case 1:11-cv-01754-DAD-MJS Document 33 Filed 02/28/14 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

responding. 

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. 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 Findings and Recommendations filed on January 29, 

2014, (ECF No. 32) in full,

2. Defendant’s Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Surreply (ECF No. 29), is GRANTED,

3. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 24) 

is DENIED, and 

4. The case shall remain open. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 27, 2014 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

Case 1:11-cv-01754-DAD-MJS Document 33 Filed 02/28/14 Page 2 of 2