Morales v. Sherwood, et al.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 31 ; FOR THIS ACTION TO PROCEED WITH THE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT, ON PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANTS SHERWOOD, COONTZ, AND FELIX FOR EXCESSIVE FORCE; AGAINST DEFENDANT SHERWOOD FOR RETALIATION; AND AGAINST DEFENDANT COONTZ FOR FAILURE TO PROTECT PLAINTIFF; AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS FROM THIS ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 5/28/2015. (Lundstrom, T)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ALEJANDRO JOSE MORALES,
H. SHERWOOD, et al.,
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO
PROCEED WITH THE THIRD AMENDED
COMPLAINT, ON PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS
AGAINST DEFENDANTS SHERWOOD,
COONTZ, AND FELIX FOR EXCESSIVE
FORCE; AGAINST DEFENDANT
SHERWOOD FOR RETALIATION; AND
AGAINST DEFENDANT COONTZ FOR
FAILURE TO PROTECT PLAINTIFF;
AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS
AND DEFENDANTS FROM THIS
ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A
Alejandro Jose Morales (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States
Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On April 15, 2015, the Court entered Findings and Recommendations, recommending
that this action proceed with the with the Third Amended Complaint, against defendants
Sherwood, Coontz, and Felix for use of excessive force under the Eighth Amendment; against
defendant Sherwood for retaliation under the First Amendment; and against defendant Coontz
for failure to protect Plaintiff in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and that all other claims
and defendants be dismissed for failure to state a claim. (Doc. 31.) Plaintiff was provided an
opportunity to file objections to the Findings and Recommendations within thirty days.
date, Plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the Findings and
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this
Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file,
the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and proper
Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:
The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on April 15,
2015, are ADOPTED in full;
This action now proceeds on Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint filed on July
3, 2014, against defendants Sherwood, Coontz, and Felix for use of excessive
force under the Eighth Amendment; against defendant Sherwood for retaliation
under the First Amendment; and against defendant Coontz for failure to protect
Plaintiff in violation of the Eighth Amendment;
All remaining claims and defendants are DISMISSED from this action;
Plaintiff’s claims for inadequate medical care under the Eighth Amendment, and
for falsification of his disciplinary report under the Due Process Clause are
dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim under § 1983;
failure to state any claims against them;
The Clerk of Court is directed to reflect the dismissal of defendants Gilera and
Gray from this action on the court’s docket; and
Defendants Gilera and Gray are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s
This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings,
including initiation of service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 28, 2015
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
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?