Allred v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation et al

Filing 10

ORDER ADOPTING 9 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Finding Service of the Complaint appropriate as to Defendants Duroy, Johnson, Moss and Martinez, DISMISSING all other claims and defendants and Referring the matter back to the Magistrate Judge for initiation of service of process, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 05/24/2017. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
)
CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION,
)
et al.,
)
Defendants.
)
)
JESSE D. ALLRED,
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Case No.: 1:16-cv-01571-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, FINDING SERVICE OF
THE COMPLAINT APPROPRIATE AS TO
DEFENDANTS DUROY, JOHNSON, MOSS AND
MARTINEZ, DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS
AND DEFENDANTS AND REFERRING THE
MATTER BACK TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
FOR INITIATION OF SERVICE OF PROCESS
[ECF Nos. 1, 9]

Plaintiff Jesse D. Allred is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

20

636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

21

Recommendations recommending that this action proceed against Defendants Duroy, Johnson, Moss

22

and Martinez for deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and all other claims

23

and Defendants be dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. The

24

Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that objections were to

25

be filed within fourteen days. Over fourteen days have passed and no objections were filed.

On May 1, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

26

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

27

novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and

28

Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

The Findings and Recommendations, filed on May 1, 2017, are adopted in full;

3

2.

This action shall proceed against Defendants Duroy, Johnson, Moss and Martinez for

4
5
6
7

deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment;
3.

All other claims and Defendants are dismissed from the action for failure to state a

cognizable claim for relief; and
4.

The matter is referred back the Magistrate Judge for initiation of service of process.

8
9
10
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

May 24, 2017

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2