Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-01401/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-01401-15/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

Isaiah J. Petillo seeks to hold the defendants liable for excessive force in violation of the 

Eighth Amendment pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 24, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge

found “a substantial portion of the factual circumstances surrounding the ... use of force are dispute.” 

(Doc. 47 at 9; see also id. at 10-12.) In addition, the magistrate judge found the defendants were not 

entitled to qualified immunity. (Id. at 13-15.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the

parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment be denied. (Id. at 15.) 

The Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties on January 24, 2023, and 

contained notice that objections were due within 21 days. (Doc. 47 at 15.) In addition, the parties 

were informed “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on 

appeal. (Id. at 16, Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 

F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). No objections have been filed by either party, and the time to do so 

has passed. 

ISAIAH J. PETILLO,

 Plaintiff,

v.

REYNALDO JASSO, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:21-cv-1401 JLT SAB (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING THE

PARTIES’ CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT

(Doc. 35, 36, 38, 47)

Case 1:21-cv-01401-SAB Document 52 Filed 02/24/23 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

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court performed a de novo review of the case. 

Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations 

are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS:

1. The Findings and Recommendations dated January 24, 2023 (Doc. 47) are ADOPTED

in full.

2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 35) is DENIED.

3. Defendant Ochoa’s motion for summary judgment (Docs. 36, 38) is DENIED.

4. The matter is referred to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 24, 2023 

Case 1:21-cv-01401-SAB Document 52 Filed 02/24/23 Page 2 of 2