Burnett

Lynch v. Burnett

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaOctober 29, 20193:18-cv-01677California3,383 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PAUL ANTHONY LYNCH , Case No.: 18-cv-01677-DMS-JLB

REPORT AND Plaintiff,

RECOMMENDATION RE:

13 v. DEFENDANT JAMES BURNETT’S MOTION TO DISMISS KEVIN BURNETT, et al.,

PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED

COMPLAINT

Defendants. [ECF No. 28] 17 18 On July 23, 2018, Plaintiff Paul Anthony Lynch (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, commenced this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF Nos. 1, 3.) On November 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) against Defendants Matthew Botkin (“Botkin”), Zachary Pfannestiel (“Pfannestiel”), Christian Sharp (“Sharp”), and James Burnett (“Burnett” or “Defendant”). (ECF No. 5.) All defendants moved to dismiss the FAC. (ECF No. 12.) The undersigned issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the Court (1) deny the motion as to 27 …

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.