K'napp v. Adams et al

Filing 29

ORDER ADOPTING 23 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL; DISMISSING Certain Claims and Certain Defendants; DISMISSING Defendants Foulks; Cate and Domen, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 8/14/2009. (Jessen, A)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
O n page 24, the findings and recommendations inadvertently refers to the First Amended Complaint instead of the S e c o n d Amended Complaint. (Doc. 23 at 24, line 1). This case now proceeds on the Second Amended Complaint, filed N o v e m b e r 13, 2008. (Doc. 16.) Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(a).
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERIC CHARLES RODNEY K'NAPP, Plaintiff, vs. D. G. ADAMS, et al., Defendants. ________________________________/

1:06-cv-01701-LJO-GSA-PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 23) ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND CERTAIN DEFENDANTS

Eric Charles Rodney K'napp ("plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se 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 72-302. On May 7, 2009, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that this action proceed on Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint,1 filed November 13, 2008, against Defendants Pugliese, Smith, Motty, Gurrero, Meaders, Johnson, Adams, Cuevas, Tucker, Sherman, Selvy, and Does 1-5 for retaliating against Plaintiff, and Defendants Motty, Pugliese, Smith, Guerrero, Cooper, Garcia, Hall, and Does 1-5 for interfering with his right to send mail in violation

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

of the First Amendment, and that all remaining claims be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Doc. 23.) On July 30, 2009, Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (Doc. 28.) In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ' 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73305, 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 May 7, 2009, are adopted in full; 2. This action now proceeds on Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, filed November 13, 2008, against Defendants Pugliese, Smith, Motty, Gurrero, Meaders, Johnson, Adams, Cuevas, Tucker, Sherman, Selvy, and Does 1-5 for retaliating against Plaintiff, and Defendants Motty, Pugliese, Smith, Guerrero, Cooper, Garcia, Hall, and Does 1-5 for interfering with his right to send mail in violation of the First Amendment; 3. All of Plaintiff's claims, other than as found cognizable immediately above, are dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; and 4. Defendants Woodford, Tilton, Burleson, Cate, Clark, Domen, Esparza, Foulks, Grannis, Hense, Henson, Larios, McCant, Murberger, Odle, Ortiz, Rollins, Surges, Wan, and Does 6-10 are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff's failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted against them. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: b9ed48 August 14, 2009 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2