Williams v. Baker et al
Filing
161
ORDER ADOPTING 146 Findings and Recommendations in Full signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 03/27/2024. (Flores, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
SHANNON WILLIAMS,
12
13
14
15
16
17
Plaintiff,
v.
CHRISTOPHER BAKER and UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA,
Case No. 1:16-cv-01540-NODJ-HBK (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL
(Doc. 146)
Defendants.
The Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that the
18
district court grant Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. (Doc. 146.) Plaintiff filed
19
objections on November 21, 2023. (Doc. 147.)
20
According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this
21
case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations
22
to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. Plaintiff’s arguments do not meaningfully
23
call into question the reasoning provided in the findings and recommendations. Plaintiff contends
24
that this Court long ago found Defendants had waived the present Bivens argument. (Doc. No.
25
147 at 1-3). Plaintiff is correct that in a March 26, 2019 Order Adopting the Magistrate Judge’s
26
Findings and Recommendation, the Court found that Defendants had waived the argument with
27
respect to their July 3, 2018 Motion for Summary Adjudication because Defendants only raised it
28
in objection to the Court’s Findings and Recommendations, and had not raised it before the
1
magistrate judge. (See Doc. No. 61 at 2). The Court did not make a finding, as Plaintiff implies,
2
that the issue was waived for all future purposes in this litigation. Notably, the Court declined to
3
rule on the underlying legal question regarding extension of Bivens and noted that the Ninth
4
Circuit had not yet ruled on the issue. (Id. n.1). As the magistrate judge correctly noted, because
5
the Ninth Circuit has now expressly ruled that a Bivens remedy may not be extended to Eighth
6
Amendment excessive use of force claims, the Court is bound to apply that precedent. (Doc. No.
7
146 at 5-6). Plaintiff fails to cite any legal authority that would warrant disregarding clearly
8
applicable and binding precedent.
9
Thus, the Court ORDERS the findings and recommendations filed on November 7, 2023
10
(Doc. 146), are ADOPTED IN FULL.
11
IT IS SO ORDERED.
12
DATED: March 27, 2024.
13
14
15
16
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?