Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01292/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01292-5/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

DARIUS SIMS, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

T. BAKER, et al., 

Defendants.

 /

1:05-cv-01292-AWI-SMS PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 12)

ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN

CLAIM AND DEFENDANTS

Plaintiff Darius Sims (“plaintiff”), a state prisoner

proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed 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 72-302.

On February 26, 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. 

To date, plaintiff has not filed an objection to the Magistrate

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.

//

Case 1:05-cv-01292-AWI -SMS Document 16 Filed 05/11/07 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

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 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 26,

2007, is ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff’s second amended

complaint, filed July 10, 2006, against defendants Resa, Baker,

and Doe under section 1983 for violation of the Eighth Amendment;

3. Plaintiff’s due process claim based on the deprivation

of his property is DISMISSED, with prejudice, for failure to

state a claim; and,

4. Defendants Cobbs, Martinez, Wadkins, and Prud’homme are

DISMISSED from this action based on plaintiff’s failure to state

any claims against them.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 10, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01292-AWI -SMS Document 16 Filed 05/11/07 Page 2 of 2