Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00230/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00230-8/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

PARNELL CURTIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

BUCKLEY, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00230-OWW-NEW (DLB) PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS, AND DISMISSING

CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

(Doc. 20)

Plaintiff Parnell Curtis (“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 8, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein which

was served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objection to the Findings and

Recommendations was to be filed within thirty days. After obtaining an extension of time, plaintiff

filed an Objection to the Findings and Recommendations on August 15, 2007.

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 andRecommendationsto be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed May 8, 2007, is adopted in full;

///

///

Case 1:06-cv-00230-SMM Document 24 Filed 08/27/07 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

2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff’s amended complaint, filed December 29, 2006,

against defendants Alverez and Munoz for retaliating against plaintiff, in violation

of the First Amendment;

3. Plaintiff’s Fourteenth, Eighth, Sixth, Fifth, and Fourth Amendment claims, and

plaintiff’s First Amendment claim against defendants Fujioka, Salinas, Buckley, and

Sheppard-Brooks are dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon

which relief may be granted under section 1983;

4. Plaintiff’s claims for equitable relief are dismissed for failure to state a claim; and

5. Defendants Fujioka, Salinas, Buckley, and Sheppard-Brooks are dismissed from this

action based on plaintiff’s failure to state any claims upon which relief may be

granted against them under section 1983. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 24, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00230-SMM Document 24 Filed 08/27/07 Page 2 of 2