Birrell v. Banzhaf, et al.

Filing 48

ORDER adopting in full 45 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 3/29/17. Defendant Bravo's 28 motion to dismiss is GRANTED in PART and DENIED in PART. Plaintiff's due process claim is DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiff's 36 motion for sanctions is DENIED. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BELLA-CHRISTINA BIRRELL,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:14-cv-01024 JAM DB P

v.

ORDER

JOYCE BANZHAF, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a complaint

17
18

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging federal claims under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, as

19

well as state claims for defamation and negligence. The matter was referred to a United States

20

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On March 3, 2017, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which

21
22

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

23

findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 45.) Neither

24

party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

25
26

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

27

ORDERED that:

28

////
1

1

1.

The findings and recommendations filed March 3, 2017 (ECF No. 45) are adopted

2.

Defendant Bravo’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 28) is granted in part and denied

5

3.

Plaintiff’s due process claim is dismissed with prejudice; and

6

4.

Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions (ECF No. 36) is denied.

2

in full;

3
4

7

in part;

DATED: March 29, 2017

8

/s/ John A. Mendez________________________

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2