Sierra v. Spearman et al

Filing 70

ORDER ADOPTING 68 Findings and Recommendations,signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/21/2021. Case is Referred Back to Magistrate Judge for Further Proceedings. (Maldonado, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

FRANCISCO SIERRA,

12
13
14
15

No. 1:17-cv-01691-DAD-EPG (PC)

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

T. THOMPSON, et al.,
(Doc. No. 68)
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Francisco Sierra is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

18

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 August 30, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations,

21

recommending that defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 58) be granted in part

22

and denied in part. (Doc. No. 68.) Specifically, the findings and recommendations recommend

23

that defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted as to plaintiff’s retaliation claim

24

against defendant Thompson and denied as to plaintiff’s cruel-and-unusual-punishment claim

25

brought against defendant Castellanos. (Id.) The findings and recommendations were served on

26

the parties and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within twenty-one

27

(21) days from the date of service. (Id.) To date, plaintiff has filed a document entitled

28

“objections to magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations.” (Doc. No. 69.) However, that
1

1

filing contains no substantive objections. (Id.) Defendants have not filed objections to the

2

pending findings and recommendations and the time in which to do so has now passed.

3

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a

4

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including plaintiff’s

5

objections, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and

6

by proper analysis.

7

Accordingly,

8

1.

9
10

The findings and recommendations issued on August 30, 2021 (Doc. No. 68) are
adopted in full;

2.

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 58) is granted as to

11

plaintiff’s retaliation claim against defendant Thompson and denied as to

12

plaintiff’s cruel-and-unusual-punishment claim against defendant Castellanos; and

13

3.

14
15
16
17

The matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further
proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

October 21, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2