Mootry v. Flores et al

Filing 63

ORDER ADOPTING 61 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 6/13/2012. Defendants T. Billings and D. Tarnoff terminated. Defendants shall file a responsive pleading within twenty days from the date of service of this order. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

MICHAEL MOOTRY,

10

Plaintiff,

11
12

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01252-LJO-BAM PC
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
R E C O M M E N D A T IO N S , DIS M IS S IN G
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

v.
E. G. FLORES, et al.,

13

(ECF Nos. 61, 62)
Defendants.

TWENTY DAY DEADLINE
/

14
15

Plaintiff Michael Mootry (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

16

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United

17

States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

18

On May 16, 2012, the Magistrate Judge screened Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint,

19

and issued a Findings and Recommendations recommending dismissal of certain claims and

20

defendants from this action. The undersigned has reviewed Plaintiff’s Objection, filed on June 12,

21

2012.

22

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a

23

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings

24

and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

25

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

26

1.

The Findings and Recommendations, filed May 16, 2012, is adopted in full;

27

2.

This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed May 1,

28

2012, against Defendants Hedgpeth, Flores, Wegman, Lewis, and Cabrera for
1

1

violations of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment for the denial of

2

Jumu’ah services;

3

3.

4

Defendants Billings and Tarnoff are dismissed from this action, with prejudice, for
Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim under section 1983;

5

4.

Plaintiff’s claims based upon denial of prayer oil and the failure to provide a Muslim

6

chaplain or inmate chaplain are dismissed, with prejudice, based upon Plaintiff’s

7

failure to state a claim under section 1983;

8

5.

9

Plaintiff’s access to the court and equal protection claims are dismissed, with
prejudice, for Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim;

10

6.

11

Defendants shall file a responsive pleading within twenty days from the date of
service of this order; and

12

7.

This action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge.

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14

Dated:
b9ed48

June 13, 2012

/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2