Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06579/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06579-5/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

WILLIAM J. NEUFELD,

Plaintiff,

vs.

MACK WIMBISH, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-06579-REC-DLB-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 18)

ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN

DEFENDANTS

Plaintiff, William J. Neufeld (“plaintiff”), a state

prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this

civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The

matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On May 5, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendation herein which were served on the parties and which

contained notice to the parties that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendation were to be filed within fifteen (15)

days. To date, plaintiff has not filed objections to the

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation.

//

Case 1:04-cv-06579-LJO -DLB Document 22 Filed 07/15/05 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

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, this Court has conducted a

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendation to

be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation, filed May 5, 2005, are

ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Defendants Wimbish and Wahl are DISMISSED from this

action for plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which relief

may be granted; and,

3. This action proceed only against defendants Voth,

Fisher, Barrajas, and Chase on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment

claim.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 14, 2005 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06579-LJO -DLB Document 22 Filed 07/15/05 Page 2 of 2