Griffiths v. Tolson et al

Filing 28

ORDER ADOPTING 22 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL and ORDER DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 7/20/2017. R. Tolson terminated. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

STEVEN GRIFFITHS,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
R. TOLSON, et al.,

Case No. 1:15-cv-01226-LJO-BAM (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS DISMISSING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS
(ECF No. 22)

Defendants.

16
17
18
19

Plaintiff Steven Griffiths (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On June 23, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that this

20

action proceed on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint against Defendant Ramirez for failure to

21

protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and that Plaintiff’s remaining claims and

22

Defendant Tolson be dismissed from this action, for Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which

23

relief may be granted. (ECF No. 22.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on

24

Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections must be filed within fourteen days after service

25

of the order. (Id. at 6–7.)

26

On July 5, 2017, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

27

Findings and Recommendations.” The document states, in its entirety: “Plaintiff Steven Griffiths,

28

hereby submits this motion ‘Objections to Magistrate Judge’s findings and Recommendations.’”
1

1
2

(ECF No. 24.) The deadline for any remaining objections has expired.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a

3

de novo review of this case and carefully reviewed the entire file. The Court finds that the

4

Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

5

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

6

1.

7
8

adopted in full;
2.

9

of the Eighth Amendment;
3.

12
13

This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed on January 5,
2017, (ECF No. 19), against Defendant Ramirez for failure to protect in violation

10
11

The Findings and Recommendations dated June 23, 2017 (ECF No. 22) are

All other claims and defendants are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s
failure to state claims upon which relief may be granted; and

4.

14

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

15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

July 20, 2017

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2