Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00510/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00510-3/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

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

ANGEL TAMAYO, 

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

R. FISHER, JR., et al.,

 Defendants.

1:12-cv-00510-LJO-GSA-PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(Doc. 15.)

ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO 

PROCEED WITH THE FIRST AMENDED 

COMPLAINT, ON PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS 

AGAINST DEFENDANTS FISHER, 

REVEES, MYERS, AND DUKE FOR 

VIOLATION OF PLANTIFF’S RELIGIOUS 

RIGHTS UNDER RLUIPA AND THE 

FIRST AMENDMENT, AND DISMISSING

ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND 

DEFENDANTS FROM THIS ACTION FOR 

FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

Angel Tamayo (“Plaintiff”) is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil 

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States 

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

On April 9, 2015, the Court entered Findings and Recommendations, recommending 

that this action proceed with the First Amended Complaint filed on June 25, 2014, on Plaintiff=s 

RLUIPA and First Amendment claims against defendants Fisher, Revees, Myers, and Duke for 

violation of Plaintiff’s rights to practice his religion, and that all other claims and defendants be 

dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff=s failure to state a claim. (Doc. 15.) Plaintiff was 

provided an opportunity to file objections to the Findings and Recommendations within thirty 

days. To date, Plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the Findings and 

Recommendations.

Case 1:12-cv-00510-LJO-GSA Document 16 Filed 05/28/15 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

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, 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 proper 

analysis. 

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on April 9, 

2015, are ADOPTED in full;

2. This action now proceeds on Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, filed on June 

25, 2014, on Plaintiff=s RLUIPA and First Amendment claims against 

defendants Fisher, Revees, Myers, and Duke, for violation of Plaintiff’s rights to 

practice his religion;

3. All remaining claims and defendants are DISMISSED from this action;

4. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims are dismissed from this action based on 

Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim under § 1983;

5. Defendant Farkas is dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to 

state any claims against him; 

6. The Clerk of Court is directed to reflect the dismissal of defendant Farkas on the 

court’s docket; and

7. This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings, 

including initiation of service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 27, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00510-LJO-GSA Document 16 Filed 05/28/15 Page 2 of 2