Davis v. Villagrana et al
Filing
14
ORDER ADOPTING 11 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DISMISSING Certain Claims and Parties; and ORDER REFERRING Action Back to Magistrate Judge for Further Proceedings, signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 6/20/2011. Defendants T. Dunn and R. Roehlk terminated. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
FRANCIS W. DAVIS,
10
Plaintiff,
11
12
CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01897-AWI-SKO PC
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND PARTIES,
AND REFERRING ACTION BACK TO
MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS
v.
T. VILLAGRANA, et al.,
13
Defendants.
(Docs. 1 and 11)
14
/
15
Plaintiff Francis W. Davis, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this
16
civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on October 29, 2009. The matter was referred to a
17
United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
18
On February 1, 2011, a Findings and Recommendations was filed in which the Magistrate
19
Judge screened Plaintiff’s Complaint and recommended dismissal of Plaintiff’s due process claim,
20
Plaintiff’s equal protection claim, and Defendants Dunn and Roehlk. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Plaintiff
21
filed a timely Objection on February 25, 2011.
22
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de
23
novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and
24
Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
25
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
26
1.
The Court adopts the Findings and Recommendations filed on February 1, 2011;
27
///
28
1
1
2.
2
3
This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s Complaint against Defendant Villagrana for
retaliation, in violation of the First Amendment;
3.
4
Plaintiff’s due process and equal protection claims are dismissed, with prejudice, for
failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted;
5
4.
Defendants Dunn and Roehlk are dismissed from this action; and
6
5.
This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
10
Dated:
0m8i78
June 20, 2011
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?