Opinion
1:19-cv-00462-ADA-EPG (PC)
10-12-2022
DEVONTE B. HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. K KYLE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BE GRANTED
(ECF Nos. 99, 134)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATINOS RECOMMENDING THAT PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION BE DENIED
(ECF Nos. 128, 138)
Plaintiff Devonte B. Harris is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
Defendants Kyle, Thompson, Castillo, Wright, Overly, Grossman, Gamez, Moreno, and Depovic filed a motion for summary judgment on May 10, 2021. (ECF No. 99.) Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion on February 7, 2022. (ECF No. 127.) On March 8, 2022, Defendants filed their reply. (ECF No. 132.) On March 31, 2022, the assigned Magistrate Judge entered findings and recommendations recommending that Defendants' motion be granted. (ECF No. 134.) Those findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within twenty-one (21) days from the date of service. (Id. at 36.) On June 10, 2022, Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 137.) Defendants did not file a response to plaintiff's objections.
At the same time as Plaintiff was litigating the motion for summary judgment, he also filed a motion for preliminary injunction on February 8, 2022. (ECF No. 128.) The assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations on June 13, 2022, recommending that the motion be denied. (ECF No. 138.) The parties were provided fourteen days to file objections to the findings and recommendations. (Id.) On June 17, 2021, Defendants filed a response to the findings and recommendations clarifying that they timely opposed the motion. (ECF No. 139; see also ECF No. 133.) On July 1, 2022, Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 140.) On August 11, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion for a ruling on his motion for preliminary injunction. (ECF No. 141.)
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), this court has conducted a de novo review of the case, including plaintiff's objections to the findings and recommendations the Magistrate Judge made for both Defendants' motion for summary judgment and Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds both findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, 1. The findings and recommendations entered June 13, 2022 regarding Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction, (ECF No. 138), are adopted in full;
2. Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction, (ECF No. 128), is denied;
3. The findings and recommendations entered on March 31, 2022 regarding Defendants' motion for summary judgment, (ECF No. 134), are adopted in full;
4. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 99) is granted; and
5. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants Kyle, Thompson, Castillo, Wright, Overly, Grossman, Gamez, Moreno, and Depovic and then to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.