Ball v. Johnson et al

Filing 13

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 in full. Claims dismissed as described; Defendants Cobban, Kling, Redfern, and Kremer DISMISSED. Signed by Judge Dana L. Christensen on 11/16/2017. Mailed to Ball. (TAG)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA HELENA DIVISION JAMES E. BALL, Plaintiff, ORDER vs. CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DAN JOHNSON, et al., Defendants. United States Magistrate Judge John Johnston entered his Order and Findings and Recommendations in this case on October 16, 2017, recommending dismissal of specific claims and defendants. (Doc. 10 at 5.) Plaintiff James E. Ball ("Ball") did not timely object to the Findings and Recommendations, and so has waived the right to de novo review thereof. 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(l)(C). This Court reviews for clear error those findings and recommendations to which no party objects. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Clear error exists if the Court is left with a "definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." United States v. Syrax, 235 F.3d 422, 427 (9th Cir. 2000) (citations omitted). -1- After reviewing the record and finding no clear error, IT IS ORDERED that Judge Johnston's Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 10) are ADOPTED IN FULL. The following claims are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted: (1) Ball's deliberate indifference claim against Defendant Johnson (Claim 1); (2) Ball's claims of threats and verbal harassment by Defendant Ross (Claim 2); (3) Ball's denial of access to the courts claims (Claims 4 and 7); (4) Ball's due process claims (Claim 5); and (5) Ball's sexual assault claim (Claim 6). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Cobban, Kling, Redfern, and Kremer are DISMISSED. DATED this I' of November Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge United States District Court -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?