Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-01054/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cv-01054-7/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
California Department of Corrections
Defendant
Correctional Officer Luken
Defendant
Mustaffa Mansour
Plaintiff
North Kern State Prison
Defendant

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MUSTAFFA MANSOUR,

Plaintiff,

v.

NORTH KERN STATE PRISON, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:22-cv-1054 JLT EPG (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

(Doc. 28)

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

rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The assigned magistrate judge found Plaintiff 

failed to state cognizable claims for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs and failure to 

protect. (Doc. 24 at 7-10.) The magistrate judge observed that Plaintiff seeks monetary damages 

from North Kern State Prison and the CDCR, which were entitled to Eleventh Amendment 

immunity. (Id. at 6.) However, the magistrate judge determined Plaintiff stated a cognizable 

claim for excessive force against Correctional Officer Luken. (Id. at 6-7.)

The Court granted Plaintiff the opportunity to either file an amended complaint or notify 

the Court of his willingness to proceed only upon the cognizable claim against Luken. (Doc. 24 

at 10-11.) Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint. On December 27, 2022, Plaintiff 

informed the Court that he was willing to proceed on the cognizable claim. (See Doc. 25.) 

Accordingly, on January 3, 2023, the magistrate judge recommended “all claims and defendants 

Case 1:22-cv-01054-JLT-EPG Document 34 Filed 02/21/23 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

be dismissed, except for Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against defendant 

Luken.” (Doc. 28 at 2.) 

The Court granted Plaintiff 14 days from the date of service to file any objections to the 

Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 28 at 2), which were served by mail on January 3, 2023. 

In addition, the Court informed Plaintiff that the “failure to file objections within the specified 

time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id., citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 

834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991).) Plaintiff 

has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the Findings and Recommendations, and the 

time to do so has expired.

According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this Court performed a de 

novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes the 

Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court 

ORDERS:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on January 3, 2023 (Doc. 28) are 

ADOPTED in full.

2. The action SHALL proceed only upon Plaintiff’s claim for Eighth Amendment 

excessive force against defendant Luken; all other claims are dismissed.

3. Defendants North Kern State Prison and California Department of Corrections are 

DISMISSED.

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to update the docket to reflect the dismissal of 

defendants North Kern State Prison and California Department of Corrections.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 17, 2023 

Case 1:22-cv-01054-JLT-EPG Document 34 Filed 02/21/23 Page 2 of 2