Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06487/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-06487-4/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

JOSHUA JAMES SHEBBY,

Plaintiff,

vs.

DERRAL ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:03-cv-06487 LJO NEW (DLB) P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 24)

ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO FILE

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT LODGED

ON JULY 23, 2007

Plaintiff, Joshua James Shebby (“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 72-302.

On May 2, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on plaintiff and which

contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the Findings

and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30) days. On

May 25, 2007 and July 13, 2007, respectively, plaintiff filed

motions to extend time. On June 19, 2007, the court granted

Case 1:03-cv-06487-LJO -LJO Document 33 Filed 08/28/07 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

2

plaintiff an additional thirty (30) days within which to respond. 

On July 23, 2007, plaintiff filed objections to the Magistrate

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations. Also on July 23, 2007,

plaintiff lodged a third amended complaint for relief under the

ADA. 

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 May 2, 2007,

are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment and medical malpractice

claims are DISMISSED from this action, with prejudice, for

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

3. Plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief is DISMISSED

for failure to state a claim;

4. Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file a third amended

complaint, limited to his ADA claim only; and,

5. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to file plaintiff’s third

amended complaint, which was lodged on July 23, 2007.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 27, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-06487-LJO -LJO Document 33 Filed 08/28/07 Page 2 of 2