(PC) Williams v. Castro et al

Filing 18

ORDER ADOPTING 17 Findings and Recommendations; ORDERED that this action shall proceed on plaintiffs deliberate indifference claim against defendantRegado for making death threats, and against defendants Regado, Ruiz, and Castro for deliberate indi fference to his safety and violation of the Equal Protection Clause, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 03/7/2021. (Ruiz added. Case (Correctional Sergeant at CSP-Corcoran) and Luiz (Correctional Officer at CSP-Corcoran) terminated) (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ROBERT CURTIS WILLIAMS, III

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

CASTRO, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No.: 1:20-cv-01617-NONE-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
(Doc. No. 17)

17

Plaintiff Robert Curtis Williams, III is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

18

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

19

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On February 1, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations

20
21

recommending that this action proceed on plaintiff’s deliberate indifference claim against defendant

22

Regado for making death threats, and against defendants Regado, Ruiz, and Castro for deliberate

23

indifference to his safety and violation of the Equal Protection Clause. (Doc. No. 17.) The magistrate

24

judge also recommended that all other claims and defendants be dismissed from the action for failure

25

to state a cognizable claim for relief. (Id.) The findings and recommendations were served on

26

plaintiff and contained notice that objections were due within fourteen (14) days. (Id. at 2.) No

27

objections were filed and the time to do so has expired.

28

///
1

1

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

2

novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the

3

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

4

Accordingly,

5

1.

adopted in full;

6
7

The findings and recommendations issued on February 1, 2021 (Doc. No. 17), are

2.

This action shall proceed on plaintiff’s deliberate indifference claim against defendant

8

Regado for making death threats, and against defendants Regado, Ruiz, and Castro for

9

deliberate indifference to his safety and violation of the Equal Protection Clause; and

10

3.

All others claims and defendants are dismissed from the action.

11
12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 7, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2