Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01619/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01619-1/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAHN GREGORY THOMPSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

PFEIFFER, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:20-cv-01619-DAD-GSA (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(Doc. No. 13)

Plaintiff Rahn Gregory Thompson is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Title II of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12132. 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 April 20, 2022, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, 

recommending that this case proceed only on plaintiff’s use of excessive force claims brought 

against defendants Dozer and Nava and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed due to 

plaintiff’s failure to state cognizable claims. (Doc. No. 13.) The pending findings and 

recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were 

to be filed within fourteen (14) days from the date of service. (Id.) To date, no objections to the 

findings and recommendations have been filed with the court, and the time in which to do so has 

now passed.

Case 1:20-cv-01619-KES-GSA Document 14 Filed 05/27/22 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), this court has conducted a 

de novo review of the 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, 

1. The findings and recommendations issued on April 20, 2022 (Doc. No. 13) are 

adopted; 

2. This action now proceeds only on plaintiff’s use of excessive force in violation of 

the Eighth Amendment claims brought against defendants Dozer and Nava1;

3. All other claims and defendants are dismissed; and 

4. This action is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further 

proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 27, 2022 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

 Although defendants Dozer and Nava are explicitly listed in plaintiff’s complaint as well as in 

the assigned magistrate judge’s screening order (Doc. Nos. 1, 10), neither appears on the current 

docket. The Clerk of the Court is therefore directed to add defendants Correctional Officer Dozer 

and Correctional Officer Nava to the docket in light of this order.

Case 1:20-cv-01619-KES-GSA Document 14 Filed 05/27/22 Page 2 of 2