Powell v. Widley et al
Filing
31
ORDER ADOPTING 30 Findings and Recommendations; ORDER DENYINGDefendant's 23 Motion to Dismiss; ORDER DISMISSING Non-Served Defendants Without Prejudice, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 8/1/18. (Marrujo, C)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DAMEON LAMONT POWELL,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
v.
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER WIDLEY, et
al.,
Defendants.
16
No. 1:17-cv-00824-AWI-JDP
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO DIMISS
ORDER DISMISSING NON-SERVED
DEFENDANTS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
(ECF Nos. 23, 30)
17
Plaintiff Dameon Lamont Powell is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
18
19
pauperis with this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was
20
referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule
21
302.
22
On October 16, 2017, Defendants T. C. Davies, Rodriguez, Vasquez, and Wilson filed a
23
motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 23.)
24
On June 28, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations,
25
recommending the Defendants’ motion to dismiss be denied. (ECF No. 30 at 3.) The assigned
26
magistrate judge further recommended that defendants Widley and Zimmerman be dismissed
27
without prejudice under Rule 4(m) based on Plaintiff’s failure to effectuate service process and
28
failure to show cause why the non-served defendants should not be dismissed. (Id. at 4.) The
1
1
findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any
2
objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen days after service. (Id.) No objections were
3
filed.
4
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this
5
court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the
6
court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.
7
For these reasons,
8
1.
9
10
The findings and recommendations issued June 28, 2018 (ECF No. 30) are
adopted in full;
2.
11
Defendants T. C. Davies, Rodriguez, Vasquez, and Wilson’s motion to dismiss
(ECF No. 23) is denied;
12
3.
Defendants Widley and Zimmerman are dismissed without prejudice; and
13
4.
This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further
14
proceedings.
15
16
17
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 1, 2018
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE
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?