Chatman v. Felker et al

Filing 76

ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/27/2012 ADOPTING 43 , 59 Findings and Recommendations; GEANTING in part, DENYING in part 29 Motion to Dismiss; TERMINATING Defendants D. Peddicord, D. Shaver, Craddock and D. Griffith. (Michel, G)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

CHARLES CHATMAN,

11
12
13
14

Plaintiff,
vs.
TOM FELKER, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16

No. CIV S-09-1028 JAM CKD P

ORDER
/

Plaintiff, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

17

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

18

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

19

On September 12, 2011 and December 16, 2011, the magistrate judge filed

20

findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained

21

notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed

22

within twenty-one days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

23

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule

24

304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

25

entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by

26

proper analysis.
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed September 12, 2011 and December

3
4
5
6

16, 2011 are adopted;
2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Docket No. 29) is granted in part and denied in
part as follows:
A. Granted with respect to:

7

i. Plaintiff’s “Count Eleven” in his complaint;

8

ii. Plaintiff’s First Amendment claims against defendant Uribe;

9

iii. Plaintiff’s First Amendment claims against defendants Shaver,

10

Griffith and Peddicord resulting in their being dismissed from this

11

action; and

12

iv. Plaintiff’s First Amendment claims against defendants

13

Craddock and Probst concerning events occurring June 7, 2007

14

resulting in defendant Craddock being dismissed from this action.

15

B. Denied with respect to:

16

i. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against defendant Uribe;

17

and

18

ii. Plaintiff’s First Amendment claim against defendant Harper.

19

DATED: March 27, 2012

20
21

/s/ John A. Mendez
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
2