Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01219/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01219-14/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

U N ITED STATES DISTRICT COU RT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

J. DOE,

Plaintiff,

v.

YATES, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:08-cv-01219-LJO DLB PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING

CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

(Docs. 54, 55)

Plaintiff J. Doe (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action 1

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 November 16, 2009, 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 November 16, 2009.

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

J. Doe is a fictitious name.

1

1

Case 1:08-cv-01219-LJO-DLB Document 73 Filed 01/13/10 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, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed November 16, 2009, is adopted in full;

2. This action proceed on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint,filed October 15, 2009,

against (1) defendants K. Scott, J. D. Bennett, S. Gonzales, J. Melendez, Griffin, W.

Brumbaugh, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, H. Martinez, and S. Kern for failure to protect

in violation of the Eighth Amendment; (2) defendants B. Diaz, P. Soares, E. Wolford,

D. J. Hatten, J. Yates, N. Green, and D. Huckabay for retaliation in violation of the

First Amendment; and (3) defendants Cate and Yates for violation of the Equal

Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment;

2. All other claims are dismissed from this action for failure to state a claim upon which

relief may be granted;

3. Defendants Schwarzenegger, CDCR, Tilton, Mukasey, G. Clark, M. Wilson, M.

Dever, A. Rangal, John Doe 4, J. Hernandez, A. Aguilar, J. Herrera, C. HudsonHuckabay, C. Huckabay, and D. Stone are dismissed from this action for failure to

state a claim upon which relief may be granted; and

4. Defendants Yates and K. Scott are granted thirty (30) days from the date of service

of this order in which to file their response to the second amended complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 13, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 1:08-cv-01219-LJO-DLB Document 73 Filed 01/13/10 Page 2 of 2