Fields v. Patterson et al

Filing 25

ORDER Adopting 23 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER for this Action to Proceed on the First Amended Complaint Against Defendant C/O Patterson for use of Excessive Force; Against C/O Patterson and Sgt. Molina for Retaliation; and Against Defendants Sgt. Molina and Lt. Finley for Failure to Comply with State Law; ORDER DISMISSING all other Claims and Defendants from this Action signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/11/2014. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KEVIN E. FIELDS,

12
13
14
15

1:10-cv-01700-LJO-GSA-PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
(Doc. 23.)

vs.

ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO
PROCEED ON THE FIRST AMENDED
COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT
C/O PATTERSON FOR USE OF
EXCESSIVE FORCE; AGAINST
DEFENDANTS C/O PATTERSON AND
SGT. MOLINA FOR RETALIATION;
AND AGAINST DEFENDANTS SGT.
MOLINA AND LT. FINLEY FOR
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH STATE
LAW
(Doc. 16.)

P. PATTERSON, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20

ORDER DISMISSING ALL OTHER
CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS FROM
THIS ACTION

21
22

23

Kevin E. Fields (APlaintiff@) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights
This case now proceeds on Plaintiff’s First

24

action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983.

25

Amended Complaint filed on May 31, 2013. (Doc. 16.) The matter was referred to a United

26

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

27

On February 24, 2014, the Court entered Findings and Recommendations,

28

recommending that this action proceed against defendant C/O Patterson for use of excessive
1

1

force; against defendants C/O Patterson and Sgt. Molina for retaliation; and against defendants

2

Sgt. Molina and Lt. Finley for failure to comply with state law, and that all other claims and

3

defendants be dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff=s failure to state a claim. (Doc. 23.)

4

On May 10, 2014, Plaintiff filed a notice that he has no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s

5

findings. (Doc. 24.)

6

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this

7

Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file,

8

the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and proper

9

analysis.

10

III.

CONCLUSION

11

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

12

1.

13
14

The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on February
24, 2014, are ADOPTED in full;

2.

This action now proceeds on Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, filed on May

15

31, 2013, against defendant C/O Patterson for use of excessive force; against

16

defendants C/O Patterson and Sgt. Molina for retaliation; and against defendants

17

Sgt. Molina and Lt. Finley for failure to comply with state law;

18

3.

All remaining claims and defendants are DISMISSED from this action;

19

4.

Defendant T. Borges is DISMISSED from this action based on Plaintiff's failure

20
21

to state any claims upon which relief may be granted against him; and
5.

22

The Clerk is DIRECTED to reflect the dismissal of defendant Borges on the
Court's docket.

23
24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

March 11, 2014

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

26
27
28
2