Ramirez v. Fleming, et al.

Filing 34

ORDER adopting in full 13 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 6/11/15. Defendants St. Andre, Peddicord, Chapman, Marquez and J. Harrison are DISMISSED from this action. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RAUL ENRIQUE RAMIREZ,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:14-cv-1937 KJM CKD P

v.

ORDER

B. FLEMING, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief

17
18

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided

19

by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On October 28, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which

20
21

were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings

22

and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the

23

findings and recommendations.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

24
25

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

26

court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper

27

analysis.

28

/////
1

1

Plaintiff objects, inter alia, to what he construes as a recommendation from the magistrate

2

judge that his claims against individuals identified as defendant Callison and defendant Smith be

3

dismissed from this action. See ECF No. 14. It appears that in making the findings and

4

recommendations the magistrate judge did not consider allegations in the body of the complaint

5

against these two individuals, because they are not identified as defendants in the list of named

6

defendants at pages 2 and 3 of the complaint. See ECF No. 13 at 4 n.2. This court’s review of

7

the complaint suggests that plaintiff also did not include a specific claim against these individuals

8

tied to the allegations he makes. See ECF No. 1 at 13-16. For these reasons, the court finds that

9

plaintiff has not properly raised a claim against the individuals identified as defendants Callison

10

and Smith in the original complaint. The court expresses no view at this time whether this defect

11

could be cured by amendment of the complaint.

12

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

13

1. The findings and recommendations filed October 28, 2014, are adopted in full; and

14

2. Defendants St. Andre, Peddicord, Chapman, Marquez and J. Harrison are dismissed

15

from this action.

16

DATED: June 11, 2015.

17
18
19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2