(PC) Mills v. Jones ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 THOMAS K. MILLS, Case No. 1:23-cv-1214 JLT SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DENYING 13 v. PLAINTIFF’S THIRD MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 14 ZACHERY JONES, et al. (Docs. 55, 57) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Thomas K. Mills asserts the defendants violated his civil rights during Plaintiff’s 18 incarceration at North Kern State Prison and moved for summary judgment on his claims. (Doc. 19 55.) The magistrate judge found Plaintiff’s third motion for summary judgment was premature 20 because the Court issued its scheduling order—and thereby opened discovery in the action—less 21 than two weeks before Plaintiff filed his motion. (See Doc. 37 at 2.) Therefore, the magistrate 22 judge recommended the motion be denied. (Id. at 3.) 23 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified him that 24 any objections were to be filed within 14 days after service. (Doc. 57 at 3.) The Court advised 25 him that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights 26 on appeal.” (Id., citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff 27 did not file objections, and the time to do so has passed. 28 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. 1 | Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations 2 || are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 3 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on April 23, 2024 (Doc. 57) are 4 ADOPTED in full. 5 2. Plaintiff's third motion for summary judgment filed on April 22, 2024 (Doc. 55) is 6 DENIED without prejudice as premature. 7 g IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 | Dated: _ May 21, 2024 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28