Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00343/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00343-3/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

JOSE AVINA,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. CRONJAGAR, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00343-LJO-DLB PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING

CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

(Docs. 14, 17)

Plaintiff Jose Avina (“plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se 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 May 14, 2010, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein which

was served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objection to the Findings and

Recommendations was to be filed within thirty days. Plaintiff filed an Objection to the Findings and

Recommendations on June 11, 2010.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), 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, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed May 14, 2010, is adopted in full;

2. This action proceed on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed October 29, 2009,

against Defendants Cronjager, Lunes, Ruff, Roman, and Fischer for violation of the

Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and against Defendants Cronjager

1

Case 1:09-cv-00343-LJO-DLB Document 18 Filed 06/17/10 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

and Lunes for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment; and

3. Defendants Dotson, Fields, Castillo, Ortiz, the Director of CDCR Doe 1, Lopez,

Moore, Garcia, Recorder Doe 2, and Does 3 to 6 are dismissed from this action for

failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 16, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 1:09-cv-00343-LJO-DLB Document 18 Filed 06/17/10 Page 2 of 2