Ryan James Johnson v. K. Graves
Filing
12
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants 11 , signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/31/2018: Defendant Villanueva is DISMISSED from this action; This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order. (Hellings, J)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
RYAN JAMES JOHNSON,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
v.
K. GRAVES, et al.,
15
Defendants.
No. 1:17-cv-01159-DAD-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS
(Doc. No. 11)
16
17
Plaintiff Ryan James Johnson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis
18
in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United
19
States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
20
On November 13, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and
21
recommendations recommending that this case proceed on plaintiff’s claim against defendant K.
22
Graves for deliberate indifference to plaintiff’s conditions of confinement in violation of the
23
Eighth Amendment. (Doc. No. 11.) The magistrate judge further recommended that all other
24
claims against defendant Graves be dismissed for failure to state a claim, and that plaintiff’s
25
claims against defendant Villanueva also be dismissed from this action, without leave to amend,
26
for failure to state a claim. (Id.) Plaintiff was given thirty days to file objections to those findings
27
and recommendations. Plaintiff did not file any objections, and the time in which to do so has
28
now passed.
1
1
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the
2
undersigned has conducted a de novo review of plaintiff’s case. The undersigned concludes the
3
findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.
4
5
6
7
Accordingly:
1. The findings and recommendations issued on November 13, 2017 (Doc. No. 11) are
adopted in full;
2. This action proceeds solely on plaintiff’s claim against defendant Graves for deliberate
8
indifference to plaintiff’s conditions of confinement in violation of the Eighth
9
Amendment;
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
3. Plaintiff’s remaining claims against defendant Graves are dismissed for failure to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted;
4. Defendant Villanueva is dismissed from this action due to plaintiff’s failure to state a
cognizable claim against that defendant; and
5. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings
consistent with this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
January 31, 2018
UNITED STATES 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?