Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00695/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00695-16/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KING MWASI,

Plaintiff,

v.

CORCORAN STATE PRISON et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:13-cv-00695-DAD-JLT

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

(Doc. Nos. 59, 60)

Plaintiff, King Mwasi, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 

civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to the assigned 

magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States 

District Court for the Eastern District of California.

On May 20, 2015, the assigned magistrate judge screened the third amended complaint 

and issued findings and recommendations, recommending that plaintiff be allowed to proceed on 

some of his claims and that the rest of his claims be dismissed. (Doc. No. 60.) The findings and 

recommendation were served that same day and allowed thirty days for plaintiff to file objections. 

(Id.) After receiving a sixty-day extension of time, plaintiff has not filed any objections. (Doc. 

Nos. 61, 62.) 

/////

Case 1:13-cv-00695-DAD-JLT Document 63 Filed 09/19/16 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), the 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. As the magistrate 

judge noted, liberally construed, plaintiff’s third amended complaint appears to state cognizable 

claims against defendants LVN Reynoso and LVN Teran for deliberate indifference to plaintiff’s 

serious medical needs. (See Doc. No. 60 at 19–20.) However, because those claims are not 

related to the other claims on which plaintiff will proceed in this action, they should be dismissed. 

(Id.) To the extent plaintiff wishes to assert those claims against defendants LVN Reynoso and 

LVN Teran, plaintiff is advised to file each of them with the court in separate complaints.

Accordingly,

1. The May 20, 2016 findings and recommendations (Doc. No. 60), are adopted in full;

2. This action for damages shall proceed on the following claims in plaintiff’s third 

amended complaint: 

a. against defendants Dr. Mahoney, Dr. Blanchard, Urbano LCSW, and Prince 

LCSW for deliberate indifference of plaintiff’s serious medical needs in violation 

of the Eighth Amendment; 

b. against defendants Dr. Blanchard and Prince LCSW for retaliation in violation of 

the First Amendment; 

c. against defendant guards Cordova, Torres, and J. Gomez for excessive use of force 

and regarding the conditions of his confinement in violation of the Eighth 

Amendment, and against Sgt. Holland for his knowledge and acquiescence in 

defendant guard Torres’ use of excessive force; and 

3. All other claims and defendants are dismissed; and

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

consistent with this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 17, 2016 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00695-DAD-JLT Document 63 Filed 09/19/16 Page 2 of 2