Dixon v. Oleachea, et al.

Filing 122

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/12/2021 ADOPTING 102 Findings and Recommendations in full. Plaintiff's 75 motion for summary judgment is DENIED. Defendant Hall's 82 motion for summary judgment is GRANT ED and Hall is DISMISSED from this action. Defendant Oleachea's 89 motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. GRANTED as to plaintiff's retaliation claim; and b. DENIED as to plaintiff's excessive force claim. This case shall proceed to trial on plaintiff's excessive force claim against defendant Oleachea. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

NATHANIEL DIXON,

12
13
14

No. 2:15-cv-2372 KJM AC P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

DAVID OLEACHEA, et al.,

15

Defendant.

16
17

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

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.

20

On September 18, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which

21

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

22

recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Plaintiff and defendant Oleachea have

23

filed objections to the findings and recommendations, defendant Hall has responded to plaintiff’s

24

objections and plaintiff has responded to defendant Oleachea’s objections. ECF Nos. 110, 111,

25

112, 119.

26

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

27

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

28

findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed September 18, 2020, are adopted in full.

3

2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 75, is DENIED.

4

3. Defendant Hall’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 82, is GRANTED and Hall

5
6
7

is DISMISSED from this action.
4. Defendant Oleachea’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 89, is GRANTED IN
PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:

8

a. GRANTED as to plaintiff’s retaliation claim; and

9

b. DENIED as to plaintiff’s excessive force claim.

10

5. This case shall proceed to trial on plaintiff’s excessive force claim against defendant

11

Oleachea.

12

DATED: July 12, 2021.

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