Filed: Sep. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. No. 15) DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . Plaintiff Eugene C. Brown is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. On July 12, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge entered findin
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. No. 15) DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . Plaintiff Eugene C. Brown is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. On July 12, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge entered finding..
More
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(Doc. No. 15)
DALE A. DROZD, District Judge.
Plaintiff Eugene C. Brown is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.
On July 12, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge entered findings and recommendations recommending that plaintiff's complaint be allowed to proceed against defendants C. Chothia, A. Shaw, L. Kempe, C. Jukes, M. Gilmore, J. Walker, M. Crutchfield, K.Z. Allen, D. Artis, and C. Patillo for deliberate indifference to serious risk of harm in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against defendants C. Jukes, M. Londono, and M. Crutchfield for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment. (Doc. No. 15 at 2.) In addition, the magistrate judge recommended that all other claims and defendants be dismissed for failure to state a claim. (Id.) Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed any objections and the time to do so has passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly:
1. The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on July 12, 2019 (Doc. No. 15) are adopted in full;
2. This action now proceeds against defendants C. Chothia, A. Shaw, L. Kempe, C. Jukes, M. Gilmore, J. Walker, M. Crutchfield, K.Z. Allen, D. Artis, and C. Patillo for deliberate indifference to serious risk of harm in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against defendants C. Jukes, M. Londono, and M. Crutchfield for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment;
3. All remaining claims, including all claims against defendant H. B. Anglea, are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim; and
4. This case is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
