Taylor v. Wuerth

Full title: ROBERT TAYLOR, Plaintiff, v. WUERTH, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Jul 30, 2015

2:12-cv-1230 MCE DAD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 30, 2015)

Opinion

ROBERT TAYLOR, Plaintiff, v. WUERTH, et al., Defendants. No. 2:12-cv-1230 MCE DAD P United States District Court, E.D. California. July 30, 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 May 4, 2015, 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 fourteen 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 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 May 4, 2015 (ECF No. 37) are ADOPTED in full;

         2. Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 31) is GRANTED;

         3. Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice; and

         4. Plaintiff is granted leave to file a Second Amended Complaint within twenty-eight days of service of this order.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.