Todd v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilition et al

Filing 88

ORDER ADOPTING 84 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL and ORDER DENYING 66 Plaintiff's Motion for the Immediate Recognition of Creativity as a Religion for First Amendment and RLUIPA Purposes signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/26/2017. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL ANTHONY TODD, 12 No. 1:12-cv-01003-DAD-BAM Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 D.J. RUIZ et al., 15 Defendants. 16 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE RECOGNITION OF CREATIVITY AS A RELIGION FOR FIRST AMENDMENT AND RLUIPA PURPOSES (Doc. Nos. 66, 84) 17 18 19 20 Plaintiff Michael Anthony Todd is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 21 pauperis in this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 1, 2017, the assigned 22 magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that plaintiff’s motion for 23 immediate recognition of Creativity as a religion for purposes of the First Amendment and 24 Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”) be denied. (Doc. No. 84.) 25 Those findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any 26 objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen days of service. (Id.) Plaintiff filed his 27 objections on September 11, 2017. (Doc. No. 85.) 28 ///// 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this court has conducted 2 a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including plaintiff’s 3 objections, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and 4 by proper analysis. In his objections, plaintiff contends that the court has failed to perform 5 established tests to determine whether a belief or movement invokes constitutionally cognizable 6 religious interests. (Doc. No. 85 at 2.) Plaintiff has not identified any purported error in the 7 magistrate judge’s analysis, and the court finds no basis to deviate from the findings and 8 recommendations. 9 10 Accordingly, 1. The September 1, 2017 findings and recommendations (Doc. No. 85) are adopted in 11 12 full; 2. Plaintiff’s motion for the immediate recognition of Creativity as a religion for First 13 14 Amendment and RLUIPA purposes (Doc. No. 66) is denied; and 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings 15 16 17 consistent with this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 26, 2017 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 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?