Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01690/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01690-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Barajas
Defendant
Vance Edward Johnson
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

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

VANCE EDWARD JOHNSON,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

BARAJAS, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:14-cv-01690-LJO-GSA-PC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(ECF No. 19.)

ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO 

PROCEED ONLY AGAINST 

DEFENDANT BARAJAS ON 

PLAINTIFF’S EIGHTH AMENDMENT 

CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT 

CLAIM

ORDER DISMISSING ALL OTHER 

CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

Plaintiff Vance Edward Johnson (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and 

in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. The case now 

proceeds on the First Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on August 21, 2015. (ECF No. 9.) 

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 September 21, 2016, the court entered findings and recommendations, 

recommending that this action proceed only against defendant Barajas on Plaintiff’s Eighth 

Amendment conditions of confinement claim, and that all other claims and defendants be 

dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff=s failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 19.) Plaintiff 

was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations within 

Case 1:14-cv-01690-LJO-GSA Document 20 Filed 10/20/16 Page 1 of 2
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

twenty days. To date, Plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the findings 

and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) 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 proper 

analysis. 

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on 

September 21, 2016, are ADOPTED in full;

2. This action now proceeds on Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, filed by 

Plaintiff on August 21, 2015, against defendant Correctional Officer Barajas on 

Plaintiff’s conditions of confinement claim under the Eighth Amendment;

3. All remaining claims and defendants are DISMISSED from this action;

4. Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim is dismissed from this 

action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim; and

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

including initiation of service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 20, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01690-LJO-GSA Document 20 Filed 10/20/16 Page 2 of 2