Robinson

Robinson v. Catlett

Good Law
725 F. Supp. 2d 1203·2010 WL 2836756·2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72083
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJuly 19, 20103:08-cr-00161California3,252 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huff, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

On January 25, 2008, Plaintiff Nehemiah Robinson (“Plaintiff’), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a complaint alleging Constitutional violations and violations of the ADA and Rehabilitation Act arising from events occurring while Plaintiff was incarcerated at Calipatria State Prison. (Doc. No. 1.) The Court granted Plaintiffs motion in part to file a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) on December 1, 2009. (Doc. Nos. 62, 72.) Defendants answered Plaintiffs SAC on December 4, 2009. (Doc. No. 73.)

On March 18, 2010, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (Doc. No. 84.) On March 18, 2010, the Court issued an order pursuant to Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir.1998) (en banc) and Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409 (9th Cir.1988) warning Plaintiff that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment seeks to have the case dismissed. (Doc. No. 85.) Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to Defendants’ motion on June 23, 2010. (Doc. No. 96.) On June 30, 2010, Defendants filed a reply in support of their motion. (Doc. No. 97.) For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion for…

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.