Hicks

(PC) Ardds v. Hicks

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 22, 20211:18-cv-01324California758 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANTOINE L. ARDDS, Case No. 1:18-cv-01324-NONE-BAM (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO MODIFY

v. DISCOVERY AND SCHEDULING ORDER HICKS, et al., (ECF No. 77) Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Antoine L. Ardds (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint against: (1) Defendants Hicks, Alcantar, McIntyre, Baylon, and Sanchez for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment arising out of the alleged November 9, 2017 assault; (2) Defendants Hicks, Amaya, Alcantar, McIntyre, Baylon, Sanchez, and Severns for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment arising out of their alleged attempt to improperly assign Plaintiff outside of his designated EOP mental health level of care unit and place him in an occupied cell after a direction that he receive a…

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.