Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-00892/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-00892-2/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANSAR EL MUHAMMAD,

Plaintiff,

v.

SOLANO, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:21-cv-00892-TLN-JDP

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, 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 302.

On August 15, 2022, 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 fourteen days. (ECF No. 11.) Plaintiff has 

not filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 

F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 

See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 

magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). 

///

Case 2:21-cv-00892-TLN-JDP Document 14 Filed 09/22/22 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

Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be 

supported by the record and by the proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed August 15, 2022 (ECF No. 11) are 

ADOPTED in full;

2. All claims other than the First Amendment and RLUIPA claims against Defendants 

Ross and Solano are DISMISSED; and

3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial 

proceedings.

DATED: September 21, 2022

Troy L. Nunley

United States District Judge

Case 2:21-cv-00892-TLN-JDP Document 14 Filed 09/22/22 Page 2 of 2