Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05508/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05508-3/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

JOWELL FINLEY,

Plaintiff,

vs.

GAIL LEWIS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-05508-REC-LJO-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 45)

ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN

CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

Plaintiff, Jowell Finley (“plaintiff”), a state prisoner

proceeding pro se, 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 May 16, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and

Recommendations herein which was served on the parties and which

contained notice to the parties that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30)

days. To date, the parties have not filed objections to the

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.

//

Case 1:04-cv-05508-REC-LJO Document 49 Filed 06/27/05 Page 1 of 3
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 May 16, 2005,

is ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff’s amended

complaint, filed December 27, 2004, against defendants Gonzales

and Auten for failing to protect plaintiff, in violation of the

Eighth Amendment;

3. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims against defendants

Herrera, Taylor, Ruth, Lewis, and Buehler are DISMISSED, with

prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted;

4. Plaintiff’s due process and equal protection claims are

DISMISSED, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon

which relief may be granted;

5. Plaintiff’s claim(s) for mental or emotional injuries

is/are DISMISSED, with prejudice, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1997e(e);

6. Plaintiff’s claims against defendants Corley, Matthews,

Real, and Yates are DISMISSED, without prejudice, pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 1997e(a) on the ground that the claims were unexhausted

at the time this suit was filed; and,

//

/

Case 1:04-cv-05508-REC-LJO Document 49 Filed 06/27/05 Page 2 of 3
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

7. Defendants Herrera, Taylor, Ruth, Lewis, Buehler

Corley, Matthews, Real, and Yates are DISMISSED from this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 24, 2005 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05508-REC-LJO Document 49 Filed 06/27/05 Page 3 of 3