Jesse Washington v. Samuels

Filing 19

ORDER ADOPTING 17 Findings and Recommendations and REFERRING Matter Back to Magistrate Judge for Issuance of Service Order, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 2/13/2014. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JESSE WASHINGTON, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. R. SAMUELS, et al., 15 Defendant. 16 Case No.: 1:12-cv-01404-AWI-SAB (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR ISSUANCE OF SERVICE ORDER [ECF No. 17] Plaintiff Jesse Washington 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 28, 2014, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and 21 Recommendations which was served on Plaintiff and contained notice that Objections to the Findings 22 and Recommendations were to be filed within ten days. On February 5, 2014, Plaintiff filed a non- 23 opposition to the Findings and Recommendations. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de 25 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 26 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 27 /// 28 /// 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on January 28, 2014, is adopted in full; and 3 2. This action shall proceed solely on Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claim 4 against Defendant R. Samuels and all other claims are DISMISSED, without leave to 5 amend, for failure to state a cognizable claim. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: February 13, 2014 9 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 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?