Madrid v. Pease et al

Filing 21

ORDER Adopting 18 Findings and Recommendations, Dismissing Certain Claims and Defendants for the Failure to State a Cognizable Claim, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 7/24/17. John Madrid, Mitsy McCallum, J.D. McCamey, C.L. Miller, J.C. Black and S. Daley terminated. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

JOHN MADRID,

Case No. 1:15-cv-00770-LJO-BAM-PC

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.

15

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, (ECF No. 18),
DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND
DEFENDANTS FOR THE FAILURE TO
STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM

P. PEASE, et al.,

16

Defendants.

17
18

Plaintiff John Madrid is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this

19 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States
20 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
21

On June 13, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that this

22 action proceed on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint against Defendants Pease, Mendez,
23 Burnes, Thatcher, Aguerralde, and Sauceda for excessive force in violation of the Eighth
24 Amendment, and that the remaining claims and defendants be dismissed from this action for
25 Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (ECF No. 18.) The
26 Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any
27 objections must be filed within thirty days after service of the order. (Id. at 9.) The deadline for
28 any objections has expired, and no objections have been filed.

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 and carefully reviewed the entire file. The Court finds that the
3 Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.
4

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

5

1.

adopted in full;

6
7

The Findings and Recommendations dated June 13, 2017 (ECF No. 18) are

2.

This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed on July 21,

8

2017, against Defendants Pease, Mendez, Burnes, Thatcher, Aguerralde, and

9

Sauceda for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment;

10

3.

failure to state claims upon which relief may be granted; and

11
12

All other claims and defendants are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s

4.

This matter is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for proceedings
consistent with this order.

13
14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

July 24, 2017

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2