Caico v. Runnels

Full title: JAMES V. CAICO, Plaintiff, v. D.L. RUNNELS, ET AL., Defendants

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

Date published: Dec 1, 2005

No. CIV S-02-1608 MCE GGH P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 1, 2005)

Opinion

No. CIV S-02-1608 MCE GGH P.

December 1, 2005

ORDER

MORRISON ENGLAND JR., 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 General Order No. 262.

On October 6, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, this 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 October 6, 2005, are adopted in full; and

2. Defendant Gaulden is dismissed.