Espritt v. Saesee et al

Filing 33

ORDER Adopting FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 30 ), ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion For Preliminary Injunctive Relief (Doc. 21 ), signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 6/19/2013. (Fahrney, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 12 13 1:11-cv-00519-AWI-GSA-PC BRIAN ESPRITT, Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 23.) vs. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (Doc. 21.) A. SAESEE, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 Brian Espritt (APlaintiff@) a civil detainee at Atascadero State Hospital in Atascadero, 18 California, is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 19 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 20 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On April 30, 2013, Findings and Recommendations were filed that recommended 22 dismissal of certain claims and defendants. (Doc. 30.) Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to 23 file objections to the findings and recommendations within thirty days. Plaintiff filed no 24 objection or response of any kind. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 26 Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, 27 the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper 28 analysis. 1 1 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 2 1. 3 The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on April 30, 2013, are ADOPTED IN FULL; 4 2. This action shall proceed only against defendants Saesee, Hill, Torres, Davis, Lopez, Ballesteros, and Magallon for use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and 3. 5 All remaining claims and defendants are dismissed from this action; 6 7 8 a. Plaintiff’s claim for loss of property, ADA claim, medical claim, claim for denial of access to courts, and claims for declaratory relief and attorney’s fees are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim; and b. 9 Defendants Velazquez, Furlong, and Goss are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff's failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted against them. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 18 Dated: June 19, 2013 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 19 DEAC_Signature-END: 20 21 0m8i788 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?