Gonzales v. Ferrso, et al.

Filing 42

ORDER ADOPTING 40 Findings and Recommendations and GRANTING In Part 25 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/29/18. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL GONZALES,

12

No. 1:16-cv-01813-DAD-EPG

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

FERRSO, et al.,

15

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING IN
PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
DISMISS
Defendants.
(Doc. Nos. 25, 40)

16
17

Plaintiff Michael Gonzales is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

18
19

this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On November 30, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and

20
21

recommendations, recommending that defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 25) be granted in

22

part and denied in part. (Doc. No. 40.) The findings and recommendations were served on the

23

parties and contained notice that objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen days. To

24

date, neither party has filed objections, and the time for doing so has now passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

25
26

court has conducted a de novo review of the matter. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

27

court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

28

/////
1

1

Accordingly,

2

1.

3

The findings and recommendations issued November 30, 2017 (Doc. No. 40) are
adopted in full;

4

2.

Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 25) is granted in part and denied in part;

5

3.

This action proceeds only against defendants Garcia, Brosman, B. Zavala, Herrick,

6

Tacara, Franklin, Rodriguez, Escalante, and Davis on plaintiff’s claim alleging

7

violation of his right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment;

8

4.

9

These remaining defendants are directed to file an appropriate responsive pleading
in accordance with Rule 12(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

10

5.

All remaining claims and defendants are dismissed from this action; and

11

6.

The case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.

12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 29, 2018
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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