(PC) Miller v. Montgomery

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 30, 20252:23-cv-00994California625 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 | Elijah Lee Miller, No. 2:23-cv-00994-KJM-DMC 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. Andrew Montgomery, 1S Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. 18 | § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. 19 | § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 8, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, ECF No. 22, 21 | which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 | the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed objections 23 | to the findings and recommendations, ECF No. 24, and defendant filed a response, ECF No. 25. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 25 | court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.