From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Low v. Stanton

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 22, 2010
No. CIV S-05-2211 MCE DAD P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV S-05-2211 MCE DAD P.

February 22, 2010


ORDER


Plaintiff, a former 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 January 14, 2010, 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-one days. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

Although it appears from the file that plaintiff's copy of the findings and recommendations was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed January 14, 2010, are adopted in full; and

2. Defendant Glenn's March 18, 2009 motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 195) is denied.


Summaries of

Low v. Stanton

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 22, 2010
No. CIV S-05-2211 MCE DAD P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2010)
Case details for

Low v. Stanton

Case Details

Full title:TONY RICHARD LOW, Plaintiff, v. GARY R. STANTON, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Feb 22, 2010

Citations

No. CIV S-05-2211 MCE DAD P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2010)