(PC) Revis v. Sherman et al

Filing 30

ORDER ADOPTING 29 Findings and Recommendations, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 7/18/2021. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
Case 1:19-cv-00034-DAD-SKO Document 30 Filed 07/19/21 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANDRE L. REVIS, 12 13 14 15 No. 1:19-cv-00034-DAD-SKO (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS STU SHERMAN, et al., (Doc. No. 29) Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Andre L. Revis is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 18 civil rights action brought 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 May 21, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s third amended 21 complaint and issued findings and recommendations, recommending that plaintiff’s third 22 amended complaint be allowed to proceed only on plaintiff’s claims brought against defendants 23 Moore, Alvarez, Guembe, and Shieffer for alleged violations of the First Amendment and the 24 Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act “RLUIPA”), and that all other claims be 25 dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to state a cognizable claim. (Doc. No. 29.) The assigned 26 magistrate judge additionally recommended that the granting of further leave to amend would be 27 futile given that plaintiff had received three prior opportunities to do so but plaintiff had failed to 28 cure the deficiencies identified by the magistrate judge. (Id. at 7.) The pending findings and 1 Case 1:19-cv-00034-DAD-SKO Document 30 Filed 07/19/21 Page 2 of 2 1 recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were 2 to be filed within twenty-one (21) days after service. (Id. at 7–8.) To date, no objections to the 3 findings and recommendations have been filed, and the time in which to do so has now passed. 4 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 5 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings 6 and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 7 8 Accordingly, 1. 9 10 The findings and recommendations issued on May 21, 2021, (Doc. No. 29), are adopted in full; 2. This action shall proceed only on plaintiff’s third amended complaint, filed 11 May 6, 2020 (Doc. No. 23), against defendants Moore, Alvarez, Guembe, and 12 Shieffer for alleged violations of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, 13 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and for alleged violation of RLUIPA; and, 14 3. 15 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 16 4. Defendant Corral is dismissed from this action; 17 5. This case is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings 18 19 20 consistent with this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 18, 2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?