Herr

(PC) Ransom v. Herr

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 20, 20232:20-cv-01209California1,995 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRYAN E. RANSOM, No. 2:20-cv-01209-DJC-DMC-P

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

HERR, 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 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On July 6, 2022, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations 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. 28.) Defendants have filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The Magistrate Judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate]…

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.