Woods v. Roddrick

Full title: TAJHIKEEM WOODS, Plaintiff, v. RODDRICK, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Oct 13, 2015

2:14-cv-2458 MCE AC (P) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 13, 2015)

Opinion

TAJHIKEEM WOODS, Plaintiff, v. RODDRICK, et al., Defendants. No. 2:14-cv-2458 MCE AC (P) United States District Court, E.D. California. October 13, 2015

          ORDER

          MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., Chief District Judge.

         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 Rule 302.

         On September 18, 2015, the magistrate judge filed Findings and Recommendations herein (ECF No. 28), which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice that any objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed "objections" which, liberally construed, do not contest the magistrate judge findings and recommendations. ECF No. 30.

         In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, 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 Findings and Recommendations filed September 18, 2015 (ECF No. 28) are ADOPTED IN FULL;

         2. The judgment entered in this action on August 20, 2015 (ECF No. 25) (and therefore the Findings and Recommendations filed June 12, 2015 (ECF No. 20)) are VACATED; and

         3. This action is reopened for further consideration of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 15) and the merits of this action, including Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order filed September 10, 2015 (ECF No. 27).

         IT IS SO ORDERED.