(PC) Revis v. Sherman et al
ORDER ADOPTING 29 Findings and Recommendations, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 7/18/2021. (Marrujo, C)
Case 1:19-cv-00034-DAD-SKO Document 30 Filed 07/19/21 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ANDRE L. REVIS,
No. 1:19-cv-00034-DAD-SKO (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
STU SHERMAN, et al.,
(Doc. No. 29)
Plaintiff Andre L. Revis is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this
civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United
States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On May 21, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s third amended
complaint and issued findings and recommendations, recommending that plaintiff’s third
amended complaint be allowed to proceed only on plaintiff’s claims brought against defendants
Moore, Alvarez, Guembe, and Shieffer for alleged violations of the First Amendment and the
Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act “RLUIPA”), and that all other claims be
dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to state a cognizable claim. (Doc. No. 29.) The assigned
magistrate judge additionally recommended that the granting of further leave to amend would be
futile given that plaintiff had received three prior opportunities to do so but plaintiff had failed to
cure the deficiencies identified by the magistrate judge. (Id. at 7.) The pending findings and
Case 1:19-cv-00034-DAD-SKO Document 30 Filed 07/19/21 Page 2 of 2
recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were
to be filed within twenty-one (21) days after service. (Id. at 7–8.) To date, no objections to the
findings and recommendations have been filed, and the time in which to do so has now passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a
de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings
and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.
The findings and recommendations issued on May 21, 2021, (Doc. No. 29), are
adopted in full;
This action shall proceed only on plaintiff’s third amended complaint, filed
May 6, 2020 (Doc. No. 23), against defendants Moore, Alvarez, Guembe, and
Shieffer for alleged violations of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment,
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and for alleged violation of RLUIPA; and,
All other claims are dismissed from this action for failure to state a claim because
the granting of further leave to amend would be futile; and
Defendant Corral is dismissed from this action;
This case is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings
consistent with this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
July 18, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?