Todd v. Johnson et al

Filing 29

ORDER Adopting 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 8/1/2013. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

MICHAEL ANTHONY TODD,

8

Plaintiff,

9
10

v.
P. JOHNSON, et al.,

11
12

1:12-cv-02083-LJO-MJS (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS
(ECF No. 15)

Defendants.
_______________________________/

13
14

Plaintiff Michael Anthony Todd (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights

15

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge

16

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

17

On March 29, 2013, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations,

18

recommending dismissal of certain of Plaintiff’s claims and Defendants. (ECF No. 15.) Plaintiff

19

has filed objections. (ECF No. 16.)

20

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c) and Local Rule 304, this

21

Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

22

Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper

23

analysis.

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28
-1-

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

The Findings and Recommendations, filed March 29, 2013, are adopted in full;

3

2.

This action proceed as one for damages on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment failure

4

to protect claim against Defendants Norton, Doe, Johnson, Harrington, and

5

Weatherford;

6

3.

7

All other Eighth Amendment claims be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to
state a claim;

8

4.

9

Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment claim be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure
to state a claim;

10

5.

11

Plaintiff’s claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress be dismissed, with
prejudice, for failure to state a claim;

12

6.

13

Plaintiff’s claim for declaratory relief be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to
state a claim; and

14

7.

15

Defendants CDCR, Mascarenas, Lambert, Subia, and Gomez be dismissed based
on Plaintiff’s failure to state any claims against them.

16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17

Dated:

August 1, 2013

/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill
B9ed48
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-