Harrison v. Linde

Full title: CARL F. HARRISON, Plaintiff, v. SERGEANT LINDE, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Jul 25, 2013

2:12-cv-2000 KJM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 25, 2013)

Opinion

CARL F. HARRISON, Plaintiff, v. SERGEANT LINDE, et al., Defendants. No. 2:12-cv-2000 KJM CKD P United States District Court, E.D. California. July 25, 2013

          ORDER

          KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, 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 as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

         On February 15, 2013, plaintiff filed a motion requesting a court order for access to the law library. On February 25, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on both parties and which contained notice to both parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections to these findings and recommendations.

         On January 3, 2013, defendants Linde and Simpson filed a motion to sever claims. On March 1, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on both parties and which contained notice to both parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed objections to these findings and recommendations.

         In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations generally to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. However, dismissal of plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims is not required as unrelated claims may be severed into separate lawsuits. Coughlin v. Rogers, 130 F.3d 1348, 1350 (9th Cir. 1997). See, e.g., Hernandez v. United States, 802 F.Supp.2d 834, 847 (W.D. Tex. 2011) (severing unrelated claims into separate suits); Baughman v. Lee County, MS, 554 F.Supp.2d 652, 655 (N.D. Miss. 2008) (same). The court finds such a severance will achieve judicial efficiency and serve the interests of justice.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

         1. The findings and recommendations filed February 25, 2013 (Dkt. No. 30) and the findings and recommendations filed March 1, 2013 (Dkt. No. 36) are adopted in full, except as ordered below;

         2. Plaintiff's motion for law library access (Dkt. No. 29) is DENIED;

         3. Defendant's motion to sever (Dkt. No. 22) is GRANTED;

         4. The claims in 12-cv-02000 shall be severed into two separate actions. The current case number shall remain assigned to the claims against defendants DeBoard and Lopez. The Clerk of Court is directed to assign a new case number for the claims against defendants Simpson and Linde, and assign the same district judge and magistrate judge as in this action. The filings from 12-cv-02000 shall be included on the dockets of each case; and

         5. The Clerk of the Court shall make an adjustment in the assignment of civil cases to compensate for the new cases filed as ordered above.