Williams v. Verna et al

Filing 22

ORDER ADOPTING 20 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL; ORDER DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendant Warden Paul Copenhaver; and ORDER REFERRING Matter Back to Magistrate Judge for Initiation of Service of Process signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 7/21/2017. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SHANNON WILLIAMS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. ANTHONY VERNA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:16-cv-00764-AWI-SAB (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANT WARDEN PAUL COPENHAVER AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR INITIATION OF SERVICE OF PROCESS [ECF Nos. 16, 20] Plaintiff Shannon Williams, a prisoner in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons 17 18 (“BOP”) proceeding pro se filed the instant civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown 19 Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) on June 2, 2016. 20 The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 21 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On June 1, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and 22 Recommendations which were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that objections were to be filed 23 within twenty-one (21) days. On June 29, 2017, Plaintiff filed objections. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de 25 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Plaintiff’s objections, 26 the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 27 analysis. 28 /// 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on June 1, 2017, are adopted in full; 3 2. This action shall proceed against Defendants Brown and Verna in their individual 4 capacity for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment, unreasonable search and seizure under the 5 Fourth and Eighth Amendments, and cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth 6 Amendment; 7 8 3. Defendant Warden Copenhaver and all other claims are dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief; 9 4. Plaintiff’s requests for declaratory relief and attorney’s fees are dismissed; and 10 5. The matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for initiation of service of process. 11 The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to mail Plaintiff a copy of his first amended complaint, 12 ECF No. 16. 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 Dated: July 21, 2017 16 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?