Gomez v. Sanders, et al.
| Jose Gomez |
| Sanders and T. Kimura-Yip |
| 2:2013cv00480 |
| March 8, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Solano |
| Craig M. Kellison |
| Garland E. Burrell |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
76
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 7/2/2018 RECOMMENDING defendants' 57 motion for summary judgment be granted; judgment be entered in favor of defendants; and the Clerk be directed to enter judgment and close this case. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
67
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 12/13/17 GRANTING 62 , 64 , 66 motions for additional time to file a response to defendant's motion for summary judgment and DENYING 63 Motion for the appointment of counsel. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the pending motion for summary judgment within 30 days from the date of this order. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 9/18/2017 DENYING 49 and 59 Requests for the Appointment of Counsel. Plaintiff to file opposition to the pending motion for summary judgment within 60 days from the date of this order. (Henshaw, R)
|
|
Filing
55
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 07/26/17 granting 54 Motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order. Defendants have until 8/07/17 to file a dispositive motion. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER signed by District Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 11/16/16; GRANTING 38 Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike. Plaintiff's claim for injunctive relief is MOOT and is DISMISSED from this action. Plaintiff's claims against the defen dants in their official capacity are barred by the Eleventh Amendment and are DISMISSED. The irrelevant statements in the second amended complaint (Doc 35 at pg 4, paragraph 6; pg 6, paragraph 5) and the declaration of inmate Brown are STRICKEN fro m the complaint. This action continues against the defendants in their individual capacities on plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim. Defendants are directed to file an answer to the complaint within 20 days from the date on which this order is filed.(Washington, S)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 10/12/2016 ORDERING plaintiff's 42 third amended complaint is STRICKEN as filed without leave of court; plaintiff's 41 motion for an extension of time is DENIED; and defendants' 44 motion to strike is GRANTED to the extent consistent with this order. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
40
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 8/26/2016 RECOMMENDING that 38 motion to dismiss and motion to strike be granted; plaintiff's claim for injunctive relief be determined to be moot and dismissed fro m this action; plaintiff's claims against defendants in their official capacity are barred by the Eleventh Amendment and should be dismissed; the irrelevant statements in the second amended complaint (Doc. 35 at pg 4, paragraph 6; pg 6, parag raph 5) and the declaration of inmate Brown be stricken from the complaint; this action continue against the defendants in their individual capacities on plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim; and defendants be directed to file an answer to the complaint within 20 days. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER ADOPTING 31 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, in full, signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 9/23/2015. Defendants' 16 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff's 28 Motion to file an Amended 12 Complaint is GRANTED. Plaintiff& #039;s 35 Second Amended Complaint is deemed TIMELY. Plaintiff's 30 34 Motions for Extension of Time to file Amended Complaint are DENIED as unnecessary. Defendants shall respond to Second Amended Complaint within 30 days of date of this Order. This matter is REFERRED BACK Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison for further proceedings. (Marciel, M)
|
|
Filing
31
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 03/30/15 recommending that defendants' motion to dismiss 16 be granted. However, as the defects discussed here are possibly curable, plaintiff should be granted leav e to file an amended complaint, and his motion to do so 28 and 30 should be granted. Plaintiff should be required to file an amended complaint, in which the defects set forth above are addressed, within 30 days. Motions 28 and 30 referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell. Objections due within 20 days. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 1/13/15 denying 25 Motion to Appoint Counsel and granting 24 Motion for Extension of time. Plaintiff shall file his opposition to the motion to dismiss within 30 days of the date of this order. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 4/11/2013 GRANTING plaintiff's 2 motion to proceed IFP; plaintiff shall pay the full filing fee of $350.00; the CDC is to collect an initial partial filing fee and thereafter the balance in monthly payments and forward to the clerk until the $350 filing fee is paid in full; the Clerk shall serve this order and copy of plaintiff's IFP on the Director of CDC; the Clerk shall also serve Financial with a copy of this order. (cc: CDC, Financial)(Yin, K)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
