Monson v. Unknown Floor Officers
ORDER Adopting 11 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER for this Action to Proceed Against Defendants Unknown Officer 1 and Unknown Officer 2 for Failure to Protect in Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and DISMISSING all other Claims and Defendants with Prejudice signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 11/17/2017. (Sant Agata, S)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case No. 1:17-cv-00395-AWI-EPG (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
(ECF NOS. 10 & 11)
UNKNOWN FLOOR OFFICERS,
ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO
PROCEED AGAINST DEFENDANTS
UNKNOWN OFFICER 1 AND UNKNOWN
OFFICER 2 FOR FAILURE TO PROTECT
IN VIOLATION OF THE FOURTEENTH
AMENDMENT, AND DISMISSING ALL
OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS
Trenell Monson (“Plaintiff”) is a pretrial detainee being held at Fresno County Jail. He
is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983. This case now proceeds on Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint, which was
filed on August 28, 2017. (ECF No. 10). The matter was referred to a United States magistrate
judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On September 28, 2017, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and
recommendations, recommending that this action proceed against defendants Unknown Officer
1 and Unknown Officer 2 on Plaintiff’s claim for failure to protect in violation of the
Fourteenth Amendment, and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed with prejudice.
(ECF No. 11). Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and
recommendations within twenty-one days.
respond to the findings and recommendations.
Plaintiff did not file objections or otherwise
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this
Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file,
the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper
Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:
28, 2017, are ADOPTED in full;
claim for failure to protect in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment;
This action now proceeds on Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint (ECF No.
10) against defendants Unknown Officer 1 and Unknown Officer 2 on Plaintiff’s
The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on September
All other claims and defendants are DISMISSED from this action, with
This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 17, 2017
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
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?