Villery v. Jones et al
ORDER ADOPTING 19 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDERED that Plaintiff shall proceed in this action on his First Amendment Claims against Defendants Jones, Schmidt, Yerton, Escarcega and Nelson, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 01/10/18. (Martin-Gill, S)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
JAY JONES, et al.,
(Doc. No. 19)
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights
action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States
Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On November 13, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s first amended
complaint and found that it states cognizable First Amendment claims against defendants Jones,
Schmidt, Yerton, Escarcega and Nelson, but no other cognizable claims. (Doc. No. 19.) The
magistrate judge therefore recommended that plaintiff be allowed to proceed on the cognizable
claims identified in the screening order, and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed
from this action. The parties were provided fourteen days to file objections to those findings and
recommendations. (Id.) To date, neither party has done so, and the time for doing so has now
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the 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 by proper analysis.
adopted in full;
Plaintiff shall proceed in this action on his First Amendment claims against
defendants Jones, Schmidt, Yerton, Escarcega and Nelson; and
The findings and recommendations issued November 13, 2017 (Doc. No. 19) are
All other claims alleged in plaintiff’s first amended complaint and all other
defendants named therein are dismissed from this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
January 10, 2018
UNITED STATES 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?