Martin v. Desha

Filing 19

ORDER ADOPTING 14 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and Dismissing Non-Cognizable Claims signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 04/11/2017. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LANELL MARTIN,

12
13
14
15
16
17

Plaintiff,
v.
D. DESHA, et al.,
Defendants.

CASE No. 1:16-cv-01353-AWI-MJS (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING
NON-COGNIZABLE CLAIMS
(ECF Nos. 13, 14)
FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE FOR
DEFENDANT TO FILE RESPONSIVE
PLEADING OR MOTION

18
19
20

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action brought

21

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action was removed from the Madera County

22

Superior Court on September 12, 2016 and was referred to a United States Magistrate

23

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States

24

District Court for the Eastern District of California.

25

On January 23, 2017, the Magistrate Judge screened Plaintiff’s complaint and

26

found that he stated a cognizable First Amendment retaliation claim for damages against

27

Defendant Desha in her individual capacity, but no other cognizable claims. (ECF No.

28

1

14.) The Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations for Plaintiff to proceed

2

on the cognizable retaliation claim and for the dismissal of all other claims with prejudice.

3

(Id.). No objections were filed.

4

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has

5

conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

6

Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by

7

proper analysis.

8

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

9

1.

10
11

2017 (ECF No. 14), in full;
2.

12
13

16

Plaintiff shall proceed on his First Amendment retaliation claim for
damages against Defendant Desha in her individual capacity;

3.

14
15

The Court adopts the findings and recommendations, filed January 23,

All other claims asserted in the second amended complaint are
DISMISSED with prejudice, and

4.

Defendant Desha shall file a responsive pleading or motion within fourteen
days of this order.

17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 11, 2017
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2