Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-01505/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-01505-1/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

 The Court notes that there is a pending motion to direct the United States Marshal to reattempt service of these Defendants. (See Doc. No. 15.) 

- 1 - 09cv1505

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PAUL DENHAM,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 09 CV 1505 JLS (WVG)

ORDER: (1) ADOPTING

MAGISTRATE JUDGE GALLO’S

REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION; (2)

GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO DISMISS

(Doc. Nos. 16, 35.)

vs.

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ARANDA, et

al.,

Defendant.

Plaintiff Paul Denham, an prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 against Defendants Correctional Officer Aranda, Nurse Benvin, Captain Marrero, E.A.

Contreras, Silvia Garcia, P. Cortez, Director of Corrections Hernandez, Secretary of the California

Department of Correction and Rehabilitation Matthew Cate, and Mr. K. Smith. The Complaint alleges

that Plaintiff’s civil rights were violated by Defendants in August 2007 while housed at the Richard

J. Donovan Correctional Facility. On December 4, 2009, Defendants Contreas, Cortez, Hernandez,

Marrero and K. Smith filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim. (Doc.

No. 16.) Defendant Cate subsequently filed a notice of joinder to Defendants’ motion. Defendants

Garcia, Aranda and Benvin did not join the motion, as they have not yet been served in the action.1

Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion on January 29, 2010 (Doc. No. 28) and Defendants filed a

Case 3:09-cv-01505-JLS-WVG Document 36 Filed 06/21/10 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

- 2 - 09cv1505

reply on February 11, 2010. (Doc. No. 30.) 

On May 3, 2010, Magistrate Judge William V. Gallo issued a Report and Recommendation

(R&R) recommending this Court grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss all causes of action. (Doc. No.

35.) Specifically, the R&R recommends that the causes of action for Eighth Amendment cruel and

unusual punishment and deliberate indifference, retaliation, and violation of due process be dismissed

without prejudice with leave to amend. (Id.) Further, the R&R recommends the Court dismiss

Plaintiff’s claim for damages against Defendants in their official capacities with prejudice and dismiss

the claim for damages against Defendants in their individual capacities without prejudice. (Id.) 

Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) set forth the

duties of a district court in connection with a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. “The

district court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection

is made,” and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations

made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(c); see also United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614,

617 (9th Cir. 1989); United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 676 (1980). However, in the absence of

timely objection, the Court need “only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the

record.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory Committee Notes (1983) (citing Campbell v. U.S. Dist. Court,

501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)).

In this case, Plaintiff has failed to timely file objections to Magistrate Judge Gallo’s R&R.

Having reviewed the R&R, the Court finds that it is thorough, well reasoned, and contains no clear

error. Therefore, the Court adopts the R&R in full. The Court hereby: (1) ADOPTS Magistrate Judge

Gallo’s Report and Recommendation, (2) GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss, and (3) GRANTS

leave to amend those causes of action and claim for damages which are dismissed without prejudice.

Plaintiff may file a First Amended Complaint curing the deficiencies stated in Magistrate Judge

Gallo’s R&R within 45 days of the date this Order is electronically docketed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 21, 2010

Honorable Janis L. Sammartino

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-01505-JLS-WVG Document 36 Filed 06/21/10 Page 2 of 2