Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00098/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00098-5/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DONALD GLASS,

Plaintiff,

v.

J.S. WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00098-OWW-SKO PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

(Doc. 20)

Plaintiff Donald Glass (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 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 302.

On March 24, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendations which

recommended that Defendants M. Hodge-Wilkins, A. Olivas, Lawence, Poblete, Kim, Mason,

Lockyer, Billiou, Diaz, Santos, Woodford, B. Silva, D. Sheppard-Brooks, R. Lowden, S. Issac, S.

Pina, Keener, Indendi, Warren, Gonzales, Hayward, Dehlert, Braswell, Trujillo, Wood, Scribner,

Watson, Ortiz, Yamamoto, Lopez, Halberg, Coombs, and D. Matthews be dismissed from this

action. (Doc. #20.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained

notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within

thirty (30) days of date on which they were served. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the Findings

and Recommendations.

///

///

1

Case 1:09-cv-00098-AWI-BAM Document 27 Filed 06/09/10 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

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 305, this Court

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

finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that: 

1. The March 24, 2010 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED in full;

2. Defendants M. Hodge-Wilkins, A. Olivas, Lawence, Poblete, Kim, Mason, Lockyer,

Billiou, Diaz, Santos, Woodford, B. Silva, D. Sheppard-Brooks, R. Lowden, S. Issac,

S. Pina, Keener, Indendi, Warren, Gonzales, Hayward, Dehlert, Braswell, Trujillo,

Wood, Scribner, Watson, Ortiz, Yamamoto, Lopez, Halberg, Coombs, and D.

Matthews are DISMISSED from this action; and

3. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s January 5, 2009 complaint against Defendants

Hamilton, Robles, Logue, Bautista, and John Doe for use of excessive force, against

Defendants Grandy, Riddle, and McDaniel for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s

medical needs, and against Defendants Hamilton, Bautista, Logue, Robles, Riddle,

Cedillos, Grandy, and McDaniel for retaliation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 7, 2010 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 1:09-cv-00098-AWI-BAM Document 27 Filed 06/09/10 Page 2 of 2