Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-01622/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-01622-8/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
L. Eldridge
Defendant
S. Heslop
Defendant
A. Sawma
Defendant
B. Velasquez
Defendant
Keenan Wilkins
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

KEENAN WILKINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

S. HESLOP, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:20-cv-01622 DJC DB P

ORDER

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 302.

On June 2, 2023, 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 thirty

days. 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. This specifically includes the 

Magistrate Judge’s screening order filed April 10, 2023 (ECF 25) on which the findings 

Case 2:20-cv-01622-DJC-SCR Document 34 Filed 07/24/23 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

and recommendations are based.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed June 2, 2023, are adopted in full; 

2. This case shall proceed only on the following claims: (1) against defendant S. 

Heslop for excessive force in violation of plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights, 

retaliation in violation of his First Amendment rights, assault, battery, and violation of 

the Bane Act; and (2) against B. Velasquez and A. Sawma for equal protection under 

the Fourteenth Amendment; 

3. All claims other than those identified above be dismissed with prejudice; 

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate defendant L. Eldridge from 

this case; and

5. This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further pretrial 

proceedings. This Order should not be construed as altering the stay entered on 

June 2, 2002 (ECF 29) for purposes of the post-screening ADR project.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 21, 2023 

Hon. Daniel J. Calabretta

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:20-cv-01622-DJC-SCR Document 34 Filed 07/24/23 Page 2 of 2