Valencia

(PC) McClintock v. Valencia

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 23, 20242:22-cv-01884California977 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 John McClintock, No. 2:22-cv-01884 KJM CSK P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 G. Valencia, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided 19 by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On December 21, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 21 were served on all parties, and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed objections to 23 the findings and recommendations. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 25 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court adopts the 26 findings and recommendations with respect to whether plaintiff has sufficiently…

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.