Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01124/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01124-7/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DOYLE WAYNE DAVIS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

GAIL LEWIS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:05-cv-01124-AWI-SMS-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS, AND

DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND

DEFENDANTS FROM ACTION

(Doc. 1 and 16) 

Plaintiff Doyle Wayne Davis (“plaintiff”), a state prisoner

proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil

rights action seeking relief under 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 72-302.

On June 9, 2006, 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 did not file an objection.

//

Case 1:05-cv-01124-LJO -SMS Document 21 Filed 09/13/06 Page 1 of 3
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) and Local Rule 73-305, 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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed June 9, 2006,

is ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. This action shall proceed (1) against defendant

Melendez on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim stemming

from the incident in which plaintiff was forced to

carry his personal property, causing injury, and (2)

against defendants Kushner, Ortiz, Hernon, Havens,

Fogleman, Shelby, Torres, and Ornellas on plaintiff’s

Eighth Amendment claims stemming from the failure to

ensure that he was provided with the medically

necessary items;

3. Plaintiff’s claims against defendants Flores, Spearman,

and Fogleman stemming from the incident in which

plaintiff was forced to carry his personal property,

causing injury are dismissed for failure to state any

claims upon which relief may be granted under section

1983;

4. Plaintiff’s claims against defendants Shelby, Petrick,

and Havens stemming from the incident in which he

burned his finger on a coffee pot and was denied

medical treatment are dismissed for failure to state

any claims upon which relief may be granted under

Case 1:05-cv-01124-LJO -SMS Document 21 Filed 09/13/06 Page 2 of 3
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

3

section 1983;

5. Plaintiff’s retaliation claim is dismissed for failure

to state any claims upon which relief may be granted

under section 1983;

6. Plaintiff’s conspiracy claim is dismissed for failure

to state any claims upon which relief may be granted

under section 1983;

7. Plaintiff’s state law negligence claim is dismissed for

failure to state any claims upon which relief may be

granted;

8. Plaintiff’s claims against defendant Lewis, Bendon,

Sacs, and Day are dismissed for failure to state any

claims upon which relief may be granted under section

1983; and

9. Defendants Lewis, Bendon, Sacs, Flores, Day, Petrick,

and Spearman are dismissed from this action based on

plaintiff’s failure to state any claims upon which

relief may be granted against them.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 12, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01124-LJO -SMS Document 21 Filed 09/13/06 Page 3 of 3