Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00449/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-00449-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

COLTON JAMES ROOD,

Plaintiff,

v.

SECRETARY OF CDCR, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:22-cv-00449-KES-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

(Doc. 52)

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant 

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On March 5, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations,

recommending that this action proceed on plaintiff’s deliberate indifference and retaliation claims 

against defendant Carrillo and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed from the action.1 

Doc. 52. Those findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that 

any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen days after service. Id. On April 3, 2024, 

plaintiff filed a notice acknowledging that he wishes to proceed solely on the deliberate 

indifference and retaliation claims against defendant Carrillo (mistakenly referenced by plaintiff 

1 The magistrate judge’s order to show cause filed February 13, 2024, summarizes much of the 

lengthy procedural history of this case. Doc. 48.

Case 1:22-cv-00449-SAB Document 56 Filed 07/01/24 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

as Castillo). Doc. 54. 

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1), this court has conducted a de novo review of 

the case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the court concludes that the magistrate judge’s 

findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Based upon the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 

1. The findings and recommendations issued on March 5, 2024, Doc. 52, are 

ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. This action shall PROCEED only on plaintiff’s deliberate indifference and 

retaliation claims against Defendant Carrillo; 

3. All other defendants and claims are DISMISSED from the action, without 

prejudice; and 

4. This matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 1, 2024 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:22-cv-00449-SAB Document 56 Filed 07/01/24 Page 2 of 2