Florence v. Nangalama et al

Filing 181

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/13/2021 ADOPTING 176 Findings and Recommendations in full; DISMISSING Plaintiff's Claims One, Six, and Twelve as to Defendants Bal, Bakewell, and Hermann without leave to amend; and This CASE is DISMISSED; CASE CLOSED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DAVID FLORENCE,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:11-cv-03119-TLN-KJN

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

A.W. NANGALAMA, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff David Florence (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this

18

civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The 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 September 18, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

21

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

22

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 176.) On

23

October 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed Objections to the Findings and Recommendations (ECF No.

24

177), which have been considered by the Court.

25

This Court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which

26

objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore

27

Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982); see

28

also Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009). As to any portion of the proposed
1

1

findings of fact to which no objection has been made, the Court assumes its correctness and

2

decides the motions on the applicable law. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th

3

Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi

4

Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).

5

Having carefully reviewed the entire file under the applicable legal standards, the Court

6

finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate

7

judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

8
9
10
11

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed September 18, 2020 (ECF No. 176), are
adopted in full;
2. Plaintiff’s Claims One, Six, and Twelve as to Defendants Bal, Bakewell, and Hermann
are DISMISSED without leave to amend; and

12

3. This case is DISMISSED.

13

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter Judgment for Defendants and close this case.

14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15

DATED: January 13, 2021

16
17
18

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2