(PC) Gann v. Valley State Prison

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 20221:19-cv-01797California996 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NATHANIEL MARCUS GANN, 1:19-cv-01797-DAD-GSA-PC

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR STAY UNDER RULE 56, WITHOUT

vs. PREJUDICE TO RENEWAL OF THE MOTION

WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

VALLEY STATE PRISON, et al., (ECF No. 52.)

Defendants. THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

14 I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Nathaniel Marcus Gann is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case now proceeds with Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, filed on February 7, 2020, against Defendants Warden Raythel Fisher, Jr., Dining Hall Officer Paez, and Culinary Staff Members Anguiano, Chapas, Lucero, Marquez, Cruz, and Moosebaur for violation of RLUIPA, violation of the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause, and adverse conditions of confinement in violation of the Eighth Amendment; against Defendants Warden Raythel Fisher, Jr., and Moosebaur for failure to protect…

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.