Munoz

(PC) Harris v. Munoz

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 1, 20222:16-cv-00830California2,187 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GRADY HARRIS, No. 2:16-cv-0830 TLN DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER JEFF MACOMBER, et al., Defendants.

16 Plaintiff is a state inmate proceeding pro se with an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims that defendants violated his Eighth and First Amendment rights. Presently before the court is plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration. (ECF No. 130.) For the reasons set forth below, the court will deny the motion. I. Background This action was proceeding on plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint against defendant correctional officers Rose, Munoz, Fong, Williamson, Calderon, Thompson, Cervantes, Fuller, and Leavitt. On June 8, 2020, the District Judge assigned to this action granted in part and denied in part defendant Leavitt’s motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 86.) Plaintiff was given leave to file an amended complaint. After plaintiff filed the Second Amended Complaint (SAC), the court issued an…

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.