ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS (ECF No. 35)

ANTHONY W. ISHII, Senior District Judge.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis and with counsel in this civil rights action brought 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.

On March 25, 2016, the Court screened Plaintiff's first amended complaint (ECF No. 9) and found it states a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim for damages and injunctive relief against Defendant Kandkhorova. (ECF No. 10.) The remaining claim for declaratory relief was dismissed with prejudice as subsumed within the damages claim. Additionally, Plaintiff's claim for preliminary injunctive relief was denied.

On December 8, 2017, the Magistrate Judge re-screened Plaintiff's third amended complaint, recognizing that a recent Ninth Circuit opinion, Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500 (9th Cir. 2017), held that a magistrate judge does not have jurisdiction to dismiss claims with prejudice in screening prisoner complaints absent the consent of all parties, even if the plaintiff has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction, as plaintiff had here. (Doc. No. 35.) Concurrently, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that the undersigned dismiss the non-cognizable claims and deny the request for preliminary injunctive relief. (Id.) The parties were given fourteen days to file objections to those findings and recommendations. No objections were filed, and the time in which to do so has now passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the Court has conducted a de novo review of Plaintiff's case. The Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

IT IS SO ORDERED.