Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-00637/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-00637-11/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

RAYMOND ALFORD BRADFORD,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAFY, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:21-cv-00637-TLN-EFB

ORDER

Plaintiff proceeds without counsel in 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 November 12, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 

which were served on all parties, and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 31.) Plaintiff

has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, 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.

////

Case 2:21-cv-00637-TLN-EFB Document 33 Filed 12/16/24 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

3

E.D. Cal. Local Rule 220. Put plainly, the amended complaint must sufficiently allege each

claim. Here, Plaintiff did not allege facts connecting Defendant Spangler to the allegations 

against Defendants Larson and Safy. As Plaintiff has had several opportunities to state a 

cognizable claim against Spangler and has not done so, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge 

that further amendment would be futile.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed November 12, 2024, are ADOPTED IN

FULL;

2. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Spangler are DISMISSED without prejudice and

without leave to amend; and

3. The case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: December 13, 2024 

___________________________________ 

TROY L. NUNLEY

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:21-cv-00637-TLN-EFB Document 33 Filed 12/16/24 Page 2 of 2