Clark-Barlow

(PC) Hernandez v. Clark-Barlow

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 3, 20192:17-cv-01681California657 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANTHONY CEASAR HERNANDEZ, No. 2:17-cv-01681-TLN-EFB Plaintiff, v. ORDER JOE LIZZARAGA, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Anthony Ceasar Hernandez (“Plaintiff”), a California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) inmate proceeding pro se, brings this action pursuant to 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. Presently before the Court is Defendant Clark-Barlow’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Summary Judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (ECF No. 39.) On October 18, 2019, 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. (ECF No. 52.) On November 14, 2019, Plaintiff filed Objections to the Findings and Recommendations. …

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.