Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-00469/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-00469-13/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

RONALD DEAN YANDELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

DONALD WASHINGTON, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:21-cv-00469-DAD-AC (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING 

DEFENDANT JONES’S MOTION TO 

DISMISS

(Doc. Nos. 33, 52)

Plaintiff Ronald Dean Yandell is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil rights action 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 November 15, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 

recommendations recommending that defendant Jones’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claim for 

injunctive relief as moot on grounds that plaintiff has been transferred to California State Prison 

and is “no longer housed in a facility run by the County” (Doc. No. 33) be granted. (Doc. No. 52 

at 2.) Further, because plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief was the only claim brought against 

defendant Jones, the findings and recommendations recommend that defendant Jones be 

dismissed from this action. (Id. at 3.) The pending findings and recommendations were served 

on the parties and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen 

/////

Case 2:21-cv-00469-DAD-AC Document 56 Filed 01/09/24 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

(14) days after service. (Id. at 5.) No objections have been filed, and the time in which to do so 

has now passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 

findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly, 

1. The findings and recommendations issued on November 15, 2023 (Doc. No. 52) 

are adopted in full;

2. Defendant Jones’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief (Doc. 

No. 33) is granted;

3. Plaintiff’s First Amendment free exercise claim is dismissed as moot only insofar 

as that claim seeks injunctive relief;

4. This case is proceeding on plaintiff’s First Amendment free exercise claim against 

defendant Toliver only;

5. Defendant Jones is dismissed from this action;

6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to update the docket to reflect that defendant 

Jones has been terminated as a named defendant in this action; and

7. This action is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further 

proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 9, 2024 

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:21-cv-00469-DAD-AC Document 56 Filed 01/09/24 Page 2 of 2