(PC) Evans v. Diaz et al
Filing
17
ORDER ADOPTING 16 Findings and Recommendations Regarding Dismissal of Certain Claims and Defendants, signed by District Judge Ana de Alba on 1/19/2023. Christian Pfeiffer, Heather Diaz and W. Mathews terminated. This action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for proceedings consistent with this order. (Rivera, O)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DAVID ARKEEN EVANS,
12
13
14
15
16
17
No. 1:22-cv-00291-ADA-BAM (PC)
Plaintiff,
v.
ERNESTO DIAZ, et al.,
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING
DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN CLAIMS AND
DEFENDANTS
Defendants.
(ECF No. 16)
Plaintiff David Arkeen Evans is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights
18
action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate
19
Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
20
On December 5, 2022, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations that
21
recommended this action proceed on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed July 7, 2022, (ECF
22
No. 11), against: (1) Defendants E. Diaz and Ramirez for excessive force in violation of the Eight
23
Amendment for spraying Plaintiff with OC spray; (2) Defendant Reed for excessive force in
24
violation of the Eighth Amendment for ramming Plaintiff with his riot shield and pinning Plaintiff
25
to a desk; (3) Defendants E. Diaz and Ramirez for excessive force in violation of the Eighth
26
Amendment for applying excessively tight ankle restraints and dragging Plaintiff by the chain of
27
the shackles into the hallway; (4) Defendants Martin, E. Diaz, Ramirez, and Marin for excessive
28
force in violation of the Eighth Amendment for beating Plaintiff with batons in the allway; (5)
1
1
Defendants A. Aguilar and E. Figueroa for failure to intervene in violation of the Eighth
2
Amendment; (6) Defendant Bradford for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in
3
violation of the Eighth Amendment for refusing to admit Plaintiff to a suicide crisis bed after
4
Plaintiff swallowed two razor blades with the intent of killing himself; and (8) Defendants
5
Stanley, Arrozola, and Aguilar for unconstitutional conditions of confinement in violation of the
6
Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 16.) The Magistrate Judge further recommended dismissal of all
7
other claims and defendants based on Plaintiff’s failure to state claims upon which relief may be
8
granted. (Id.) The findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice
9
that any objections were to be filed within fourteen days after service. (Id. at 23.) No objections
10
11
have been filed, and the deadline to do so has expired.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a
12
de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the
13
findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.
14
Accordingly,
15
1.
16
17
The findings and recommendations issued on December 5, 2022, (ECF No. 16),
are adopted in full;
2.
This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed July 7, 2022,
18
(ECF No. 11), against:
19
a.
20
21
Eighth Amendment for spraying Plaintiff with OC spray;
b.
22
23
Defendants E. Diaz and Ramirez for excessive force in violation of the
Defendant Reed for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment
for ramming Plaintiff with his riot shield and pinning Plaintiff to a desk;
c.
Defendants E. Diaz and Ramirez for excessive force in violation of the
24
Eighth Amendment for applying excessively tight ankle restraints and
25
dragging Plaintiff by the chain of the shackles into the hallway;
26
d.
Defendants Martin, E. Diaz, Ramirez, and Marin for excessive force in
27
violation of the Eighth Amendment for beating Plaintiff with batons in the
28
hallway;
2
1
e.
2
Defendants A. Aguilar and E. Figueroa for failure to intervene in violation
of the Eighth Amendment;
3
f.
Defendant Bradford for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in
4
violation of the Eighth Amendment for refusing to admit Plaintiff to a
5
suicide crisis bed after Plaintiff swallowed two razor blades with the intent
6
of killing himself; and
7
g.
8
9
of confinement in violation of the Eighth Amendment;
3.
10
11
Defendants Stanley, Arrozola, and Aguilar for unconstitutional conditions
All other claims and defendants are dismissed from this action for failure to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted; and
4.
12
This action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for proceedings consistent
with this order.
13
14
15
16
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
January 19, 2023
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?