Sienze v. Madera County Sheriff's Office, et al.

Filing 7

ORDER ADOPTING 6 Findings and Recommendations and DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants for Failure to State a Claim, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 8/18/17. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VICTOR M. SIENZE, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 Case No. 1:17-cv-00736-AWI-SAB ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM v. MADERA COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, et al., (ECF No. 6) 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff Victor M. Sienze is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 19 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on June 30, 2017, 20 which was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and 21 Local Rule 302. 22 On July 13, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed a findings and recommendations which 23 recommended dismissing certain claims and defendants for Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. 24 The findings and recommendations was served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any 25 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days from the date 26 of service. The period for filing objections has passed and no objections have been filed. 27 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted 28 a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the 1 1 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations, filed July 13, 2017, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 4 2. This action shall proceed against Defendants Kutz and Kerber for the use of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment; 5 6 3. failure to state a cognizable claim against them; 7 8 4. All remaining claims in the first amended complaint are dismissed for failure to state a claim; and 9 10 Defendants Clark, Roth, and Thomas are dismissed from this action for Plaintiff’s 5. This matter is referred to the Magistrate Judge for initiation of service of process. 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: August 18, 2017 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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?