Davidson v. Davey et al

Filing 14

ORDER Adopting the 12 Second Amended Findings and Recommendation Dismissing Certain Claims and Defendants, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 8/27/13. Defendants J.D. Lozano, C. Pfeiffer, S. Tallerico, D Davey and M. Jones terminated. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DERALD DAVIDSON,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

D. DAVEY, et al.,

15

Defendant.

16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:13-cv-0979 – LJO – JLT (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING THE SECOND AMENDED
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND
DEFENDANTS
(Docs. 1-2 and 12)

17

Plaintiff Derald Davidson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action

18

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1-2). On August 5, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued a second

19

amended Finding and Recommendation dismissing certain claims. (Doc. 12). While the Court advised

20

Plaintiff that he could file his objections to the Findings and Recommendations, if any, within 14 days,

21

he has failed to do so.

22

The Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal of Plaintiff’s claim against Defendants Davey

23

Pfeiffer Tallerico, Jones, and Lozano for the manner in which they handled his inmate grievance.

24

(Doc. 12 at 6-8). The Magistrate Judge noted that Plaintiff had no constitutional right to have his

25

inmate grievance handled in a particular manner. Id. at 6. Further, the Magistrate Judge considered

26

that Plaintiff could not assert supervisory liability against Tallerico, Pfeiffer, Davey, and Lozano for

27

their failure to ensure that their subordinates properly processed Plaintiff’s administrative grievance.

28

Finally, and most notable, the Magistrate Judge considered that it was Plaintiff’s delay in filing his
1

1

Second Level grievance appeal that ultimately caused prison officials to cancel his appeal.

2

Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi

3

Valley United School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), the Court has conducted a de novo

4

review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the Magistrate

5

Judge’s second amended Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 12) are supported by the record and

6

by proper analysis.

7

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that:

8

1. The second amended Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 12) are ADOPTED IN

9

FULL; and
2. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Davey, Pfeiffer, Tallerico, Jones, and Lozano are

10
11

DISMISSED without leave to amend.

12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15

Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

August 27, 2013

16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
DEAC_Signature-END:

17

66h44d

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