Adler v. Gonzalez et al

Filing 62

ORDER ADOPTING 59 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS to Grant Defendants' 49 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 11/03/2014. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

BRENT ADLER,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15

Case No. 1:11-cv-1915-LJO-MJS (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS TO GRANT
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL
SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION
TO DISMISS

v.
F. GONZALEZ, et al.,
Defendants.

16

(ECF Nos. 49, 59)
CASE TO REMAIN OPEN

17
18

Plaintiff is a former state prisoner who initiated this civil rights action pro se and in

19 forma pauperis on November 17, 2011. (ECF No. 1.) The matter was referred to a
20 United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule
21 302 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Plaintiff
22 since has been released from prison and obtained counsel. (ECF Nos. 36 & 51.)
23

On

October

14,

2014,

the

Magistrate

Judge

issued

findings

and

24 recommendations to grant Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment and motion
25 to dismiss. (ECF No. 59.) Plaintiff did not object to the findings and recommendations
26 and the time for doing so has expired.
27
28

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

1 conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the
2 Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by
3 proper analysis.
4

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Court adopts the findings and recommendations filed on October 14,

5

2014 (ECF No. 59), in full;

6

2. Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment and to dismiss (ECF No.

7

49), filed on July 21, 2014, is GRANTED;

8
9

3. Summary judgment is granted in favor of Defendants on Plaintiff’s First

10

Amendment claims, with the exception of his claims that he was denied

11

group programs and services, visits to the chapel, and meetings with a

12

spiritual advisor;
4. Plaintiff’s claims brought pursuant to the Religious Land Use and

13

Institutionalized Persons Act are HEREBY DISMISSED;

14
15

5. Defendant Holmstrom is HEREBY DISMISSED; and

16

6. The case shall remain open for further proceedings on Plaintiff’s remaining

17
18
19

First Amendment claims.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

November 3, 2014

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2