Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00487/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00487-2/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TIMOTHY HOWARD,

Plaintiff,

vs.

G. GONZALES, 

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:12cv00487 LJO DLB PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

CERTAIN CLAIMS

(Document 8)

Plaintiff Timothy Howard (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, filed this civil rights action on March 30, 2012. 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 February 27, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that 

(a) certain claims go forward; and (b) Plaintiff’s claims pursuant to California Penal Code 

section 118.1 and section 3084.1 of Title 15 of the California Code of Regulations be dismissed 

without leave to amend for failure to state a claim. The Findings and Recommendations were 

served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections must be filed within thirty days. 

Plaintiff did not file objections.

Case 1:12-cv-00487-LJO-DLB Document 15 Filed 04/10/13 Page 1 of 2
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

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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed February 27, 2013, are adopted in full; 

2. This action proceed on claims against Defendant Gonzales for (a) violation of the 

First Amendment based on her refusal to file his inmate appeals; (b) violation of the Eighth 

Amendment based on her denial of medical care; and (c) violation of the First Amendment based 

on retaliation1; and 

3. The claims under California Penal Code section 118.1 and section 3084.1 of Title 

15 of the California Code of Regulations are DISMISSED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 10, 2013 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

b9ed48bb

 

1

Plaintiff’s service documents were submitted to the United States Marshal on March 19, 2013. 

Case 1:12-cv-00487-LJO-DLB Document 15 Filed 04/10/13 Page 2 of 2