Harrington v. Bautista et al

Filing 28

ORDER ADOPTING 21 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants for Failure to State a Cognizable Claim for Relief signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/31/2014. Defendants S.L. Rupp, B. Hackworth and L. James terminated. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GARRICK HARRINGTON,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
J. BAUTISTA, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

Case No.: 1:10-cv-01802-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION, DISMISSING CERTAIN
CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS FOR FAILURE TO
STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM FOR RELIEF
[ECF Nos. 21, 27]

Plaintiff Garrick Harrington is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

19

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

20

636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On January 7, 2014, the Magistrate Judge screening Plaintiff’s first

21

amended complaint and found that Plaintiff stated a cognizable claim against Defendants Bautista and

22

Blaylock for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s safety in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

23

However, Plaintiff did not state any other cognizable claims for relief against any other defendants.

24

Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the action proceed against Defendants Bautista

25

and Blaylock only and all other claims and defendants be dismissed from the action. The Findings and

26

Recommendation was served on Plaintiff and contained notice that Objections were to be filed within

27

fourteen days. After receiving an extension of time, Plaintiff filed an Objection on March 12, 2014.

28

///
1

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

5

1.

The Findings and Recommendations, filed on January 7, 2014, is adopted in full; and

6

2.

This action shall proceed against Defendants Bautista and Blaylock for deliberate
indifference to Plaintiff’s safety in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and

7
8

3.

DISMISSED from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim.

9
10
11
12

All other claims and Defendants Rupp, Hackworth, James and Does 1 through 6, are

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

March 31, 2014

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14

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