Legal Opinion

(BIVENS) Hodges v. Matevousian

District Court, E.D. California

Decided March 9, 2020No. 1:18-cv-00790Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MELVIN HODGES, Case No. 1:18-cv-00790-AWI-EPG (PC) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12 v. (ECF Nos. 17 & 26) 13 ANDRE MATEVOUSIAN, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Melvin Hodges (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights 17 action. The matter was referred to a United States magistrate judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 18

636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. This case is pled as a Bivens matter and is proceeding “on 19 Plaintiff’s claims for unconstitutional conditions…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Boris Levitt v. Yelp! Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  3. Cactus Canyon Quarries, Inc. v. Federal Mine Safety & Health Review CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API