Alexander v. Ybarra et al

Filing 21

ORDER ADOPTING 17 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL and ORDER DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/14/2018. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DARRION LARRY ALEXANDER,

12
13
14
15

No. 1:17-cv-00804-DAD-SAB (PC)

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

G. YBARRA, et al.,
(Doc. No. 17)
Defendants.

16
17
18
19

Plaintiff Darrion Larry Alexander is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On November 21, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge screened the complaint and found

20

that plaintiff stated a cognizable claim against defendants A. Johnson, G. Ybarra, E. Lopez, M.

21

Garcia, E. Barron, O. Delgado, and T. Lee for excessive use of force in violation of the Eighth

22

Amendment. (Doc. No. 14.) However, the magistrate judge found that plaintiff had not

23

sufficiently alleged facts to state a cognizable claim for deliberate indifference to a serious

24

medical need against defendant J. Presson. (Id.) Plaintiff was given the opportunity to amend the

25

complaint or notify the court of his intent to proceed only on his excessive use of force claim

26

against defendants A. Johnson, G. Ybarra, E. Lopez, M. Garcia, E. Barron, O. Delgado, and T.

27

Lee which had been found to be cognizable. (Id.) On December 11, 2017, plaintiff notified the

28

court of his intent to proceed only on his claim of excessive use of force. (Doc. No. 15.)
1

1

Therefore, on December 12, 2017, the magistrate judge issued findings and

2

recommendations recommending that this action proceed only on plaintiff’s claim of excessive

3

use of force, and that his deliberate indifference claim brought against defendant J. Presson be

4

dismissed for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. The findings and recommendations

5

were served on plaintiff and contained notice that objections thereto were to be filed within

6

fourteen days. No objections were filed and the time period to do so has passed.

7

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the

8

undersigned has conducted a de novo review of the case. The undersigned concludes the findings

9

and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.

10

Accordingly:

11

1. The findings and recommendations issued December 12, 2017 (Doc. No. 17) are

12

adopted in full;
2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff’s claim of excessive force against defendants

13
14

A. Johnson, G. Ybarra, E. Lopez, M. Garcia, E. Barron, O. Delgado, and T. Lee;
3. Plaintiff’s claim of deliberate indifference against J. Presson is dismissed for

15
16

failure to state a cognizable claim for relief; and

17

4. The matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for initiation of service of

18
19
20

process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

February 14, 2018
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2