Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01156/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01156-10/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

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

Plaintiff Perry C. Blair is appearing 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 July 15, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and 

Recommendations which was served on the parties and contained notice that objections were to be 

filed within thirty days. Plaintiff filed objections on August 12, 2016, and Defendants filed objections 

on August 15, 2016. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de 

novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including the objections, the Court 

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

///

///

PERRY C. BLAIR,

 Plaintiff,

v.

CDCR, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-01156-LJO-SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING IN PART 

AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ 

MOTION TO DISMISS

[ECF Nos. 31, 32, 38, 52]

Case 1:14-cv-01156-DAD-SAB Document 55 Filed 09/28/16 Page 1 of 2
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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on July 15, 2016, are adopted in full; and

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief and officialcapacity claims for monetary damages is GRANTED and these claims are DISMISSED 

from the action, with prejudice;

3. Defendants’ motion to dismiss certain claims for failure to state a cognizable claim for 

relief is DENIED;

4. Plaintiff’s motion to amend and/or supplement the second amended complaint is 

GRANTED to the cure the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20 defect only; 

5. Defendants’ motion to sever Plaintiff’s medical claim against Defendants Does Three, 

Four, Five and Six is DENIED, without prejudice; 

6. The Clerk of Court is directed to file and docket Plaintiff’s third amended complaint, 

attached to his objections at pages 19 through 82 (ECF No. 53)1; and

7. The matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings, including 

screening of the third amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 28, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

 

1

References to page numbers are to the Court’s Electronic Case File pagination headers.

Case 1:14-cv-01156-DAD-SAB Document 55 Filed 09/28/16 Page 2 of 2