Guy v. Mims et al

Filing 20

ORDER ADOPTING 16 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 12/3/2013. Margret Mims (Sheriff) terminated. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
PATRICK EDWARD GUY,

Case No. 1:11-cv-00721 AWI-DLB PC

9
Plaintiff,
10
v.

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

11
MARGARET MIMS, et al.,

(Document 16)

12
Defendants.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Plaintiff Patrick Edward Guy (“Plaintiff”) is an inmate in the custody of the Fresno County
Jail. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed on May 5,
2011. On February 25, 2013, Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint. The matter was
referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule
302.
On October 18, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that this
action proceed against Defendants Ashmore, LeFors and Kurtze for violations of the free exercise
clause of the First Amendment and violation of RLUIPA. The Court further recommended that
Defendant Mims be dismissed. The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and
contained notice that any objections were to be filed within thirty days. Over thirty days have passed
and Plaintiff has not filed objections.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de
novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the Findings
and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.

28
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

The Findings and Recommendations, filed October 18, 2013, are ADOPTED in full;

3

2.

This action SHALL proceed on Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint against

4

Defendants Ashmore, LeFors and Kurtze for violations of the free exercise clause of

5

the First Amendment and violation of RLUIPA; and

6

3.

Defendant Mims IS DISMISSED from this action.

7
8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 3, 2013
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2