Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01608/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01608-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jose Lopez
Defendant
Larry Nielsen
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LARRY NIELSEN,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOSE LOPEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:14-cv-01608-AWI-MJS (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DISMISSAL 

OF CERTAIN OF PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS

AND DEFENDANTS AND TO DENY AS 

MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR 

INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL 

(Docs. 28 & 16)

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 

rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Docs. 1 & 8.) The matter was 

referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and 

Local Rule 302 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

On August 28, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and 

Recommendations (Doc. 28) that (1) Plaintiff should proceed on the excessive force 

claim against Defendant Lopez, (2) all other claims asserted in the Complaint and all 

other named Defendants should be dismissed, and (3) Plaintiff’s motion for interlocutory 

appeal (Doc. 16) should be denied as moot. Plaintiff did not object to the Findings and 

Recommendations and the time for doing so has passed.

Case 1:14-cv-01608-DAD-MJS Document 30 Filed 10/07/15 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), the 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 (Doc. 28), filed on August 28, 2015, is

adopted in full;

2. Plaintiff is to proceed on the excessive force claim against Defendant Lopez 

and Plaintiff’s motion for interlocutory appeal (Doc. 16) is denied as moot; and

3. All other claims asserted in the Complaint and all other named Defendants are

dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 6, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01608-DAD-MJS Document 30 Filed 10/07/15 Page 2 of 2