Orel

(PC) Haynes v. Orel

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 6, 20222:19-cv-01988California1,649 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LELAND HAYNES, No. 2:19-cv-1988 KJM AC Plaintiff, v. ORDER DAVIE OREL, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On September 24, 2021, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. ECF No. 13. After screening plaintiff’s first amended complaint as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the magistrate judge found plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and has recommended dismissal of the first amended complaint without leave to amend. Id. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings…

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.