Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01812/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01812-6/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

BRYAN E. RANSOM,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. MARTINEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:08-cv-01812-AWI-SKO PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

ORDER DISMISSING FIRST AMENDMENT

RETALIATION CLAIMS AND STATE LAW

CLAIMS 

(Doc. 17)

Plaintiff Bryan E. Ransom (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding 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 April 30, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendations which

recommended that Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claims and state law claims be dismissed. 

The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice to Plaintiff that

any objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30) days of date

on which theywere served. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 305, 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.

///

///

///

1

Case 1:08-cv-01812-AWI -GBC Document 22 Filed 06/15/10 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

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that: 

1. The April 30, 2010 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED in full; 

2. Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claims and state law claims are DISMISSED;

and

3. This action is REFERRED to the Magistrate Judge for further pretrial proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 14, 2010 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 1:08-cv-01812-AWI -GBC Document 22 Filed 06/15/10 Page 2 of 2