Filed: Aug. 01, 2017
Latest Update: Aug. 01, 2017
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF NOS. 72 & 76) ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO PROCEED AGAINST DEFENDANTS BRANNUM AND HERRERA ON PLAINTIFF'S FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS CLAIM, FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS CLAIM UNDER DEVEREAUX, RETALIATION CLAIM, SECTION 1983 MALICIOUS PROSECUTION CLAIM, AND CONSPIRACY CLAIM, AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . Leonard Ransom, Jr. ("Plaintiff") is a state p
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF NOS. 72 & 76) ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO PROCEED AGAINST DEFENDANTS BRANNUM AND HERRERA ON PLAINTIFF'S FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS CLAIM, FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS CLAIM UNDER DEVEREAUX, RETALIATION CLAIM, SECTION 1983 MALICIOUS PROSECUTION CLAIM, AND CONSPIRACY CLAIM, AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . Leonard Ransom, Jr. ("Plaintiff") is a state pr..
More
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF NOS. 72 & 76)
ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO PROCEED AGAINST DEFENDANTS BRANNUM AND HERRERA ON PLAINTIFF'S FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS CLAIM, FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS CLAIM UNDER DEVEREAUX, RETALIATION CLAIM, SECTION 1983 MALICIOUS PROSECUTION CLAIM, AND CONSPIRACY CLAIM, AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, Chief District Judge.
Leonard Ransom, Jr. ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case now proceeds on Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, which was filed on May 15, 2017. (ECF No. 72). The matter was referred to a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On June 30, 2017, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and recommendations, recommending that this action proceed against defendants Brannum and Herrera on Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim, Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claim under Devereaux, retaliation claim, section 1983 malicious prosecution claim, and conspiracy claim, and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed with prejudice. (ECF No. 76). Both parties were provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations. No objections were filed.
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 proper analysis.
Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:
1. The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on June 30, 2017, are ADOPTED in full;
2. This action now proceeds on Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 72), against defendants Brannum and Herrera on Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim, Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claim under Devereaux, retaliation claim, section 1983 malicious prosecution claim, and conspiracy claim;
3. All other claims and defendants are DISMISSED from this action, with prejudice;
4. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to reflect the dismissal of defendant J. Castro on the Court's docket; and
5. This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
