Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01655/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01655-2/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PATRICK D. SAMPSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-1655 LEW GGH P

vs.

C. BARTON, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court has separately issued an order addressing the second amended

complaint filed January 7, 2008. In this order, the court found that plaintiff stated a colorable

claim for violation of his right to access the courts as to defendants Barton and Probst. The court

also found that plaintiff’s due process claim against these defendants was not colorable. The

court further found that plaintiff had not stated a colorable claim for relief against defendant

Felker.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated in that order, IT IS HEREBY

RECOMMENDED that the due process claims against defendants Barton and Probst and all

claims against defendant Felker contained in the second amended complaint filed January 7,

2008, be dismissed.

Case 2:07-cv-01655-JAM-GGH Document 16 Filed 01/30/08 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

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is 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).

DATED: 01/30/08 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

sam1655.56

Case 2:07-cv-01655-JAM-GGH Document 16 Filed 01/30/08 Page 2 of 2