Lirones

(PC) Jace v. Lirones

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 3, 20241:22-cv-00419California1,937 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL JACE, Case No.: 1:22-cv-00419-NODJ-CDB (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR

RECONSIDERATION

v. (ECF No. 38) MARGARET LIRONES, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Michael Jace is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. I. BACKGROUND On March 16, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations to Dismiss Certain Claims and Defendants. (ECF No. 20.) Specifically, the magistrate judge recommended Defendants Ken Clark and Margaret Lirones be dismissed from this action for Plaintiff’s failure to state any claim against these defendants and that the action proceed only on Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant Peterson. (Id. at 3-13.) On April 5, 2023, Plaintiff filed his objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 21.) On April 7, 2023, Senior District Judge Anthony W. Ishii…

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.