(PC) Hammler v. Clark et al

Filing 140

ORDER ADOPTING 137 Findings and Recommendations and GRANTING Defendants' 123 Motion for Summary Judgment signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 03/24/2022. CASE CLOSED. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ALLEN HAMMLER,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
CLARK, et.al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:19-cv-00373-AWI-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, AND GRANTING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
(Doc. Nos. 123, 137)

Plaintiff Allen Hammler is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

19

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to

20

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

21

On January 27, 2022, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendations

22

recommending that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted. (Doc. No. 137.) The

23

Findings and Recommendation was served on the parties and contained notice that objections were

24

due within twenty-one (21) days. (Id.) On February 24, 2022, Plaintiff filed objections. (Doc. No.

25

138.) On March 9, 2022, Defendants filed a response. (Doc. No. 139.)

26

In his objections, Plaintiff contends that the Court “assumed” that meals arrive precooked to

27

the prison and he was denied evidence from the manufacturer to support such claim. Contrary to

28

Plaintiff’s contention, the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to compel because his request was
1

1

insufficient to warrant a response. (Doc. No. 106.) Thus, Plaintiff’s vague reference to evidence from

2

the manufacturer is based on nothing more than speculation and does not substantially challenge the

3

analysis set forth in the Findings and Recommendations. Furthermore, it remains undisputed that any

4

burden on the ability of Plaintiff to practice his religion was de minimis.

5

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

6

novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Plaintiff’s objections

7

and Defendants’ response, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the

8

record and by proper analysis.

9
10

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.

adopted in full;

11
12

2.

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 123) filed on April 16, 2021 is
granted; and

13
14

The Findings and Recommendations (Doc. No. 137) filed on January 27, 2022, are

3.

The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of Defendants.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17

Dated: March 24, 2022

18

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2