Case Information
*1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KENNARD DAVIS, No. 2:08-cv-0593 KJM SCR P Plaintiff,
v.
JAMES WALKER, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________________ No. 2:10-cv-2139 KJM SCR P
KENNARD DAVIS, Plaintiff,
v. ORDER
JAMES WALKER, et al.,
Defendants.
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed these civil rights actions seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
/////
On March 4, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Following an extension of time, plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. ECF No. 462. The court also construes plaintiff’s pending motions concerning the procedures utilized to determine her competency as objections to these same findings and recommendations. ECF Nos. 419, 426-430, 432-433, 435, 440, 442-443, 454, 456, 459, 460, 461; ECF No. 494 in Case No. 2:10-cv-2139. Defendants filed a response to plaintiff’s objections.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the undersigned conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff’s objections (ECF Nos. 419, 426-430, 432-433, 435, 440, 442-443, 454, 456, 459, 460; ECF No. 494 in Case No. 2:10-cv-2139) are overruled and, to the extent they were filed as motions, they are denied. The Clerk of Court shall terminate all the filings identified in the preceding sentence.
2. The findings and recommendations filed March 4, 2025, are adopted in full (ECF No.
421; ECF No. 496 in Case No. 2:10-cv-2139).
3. Plaintiff’s motions to be reinstated to competency (ECF No. 271; ECF No. 349 in Case No. 2:10-cv-2139-KJM-SCR-P) are denied based on the lack of any evidence in support thereof.
4. All other pending motions filed by plaintiff (ECF Nos. 431, 434, 437, 444, 457-458, 464, 465) are vacated based on this court’s determination that she is incompetent to proceed pro se. The Clerk of Court shall terminate these motions.
5. This matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for proceedings pursuant to Rule 17(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
6. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a courtesy copy of this order on attorneys Saor E. Stetler, P.O. Box 2395, Mill Valley, CA 94942, and Stephanie Marie Adraktas, 2625 Alcatraz Avenue, #233, Berkeley, CA 94705, as they have been appointed to represent plaintiff in her *3 pending habeas appeal that is stayed in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals pending this court’s competency determination, which has now concluded with the court’s determination plaintiff is incompetent to proceed as a pro se litigant.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 4, 2025.