(PC) Comundoiwilla v. Evans, No. 1:2004cv06721 - Document 37 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 33 ), signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 6/4/2010. The Court ORDERS that: The April 27, 2010 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED in full. Plaintiff's First Amendment claims, Fourteenth Amendment due process due process claims, and RLUIPA claims against Defendant Liles are DISMISSED. Defendant Liles is DISMISSED from this action. (Scrivner, E)

Download PDF
(PC) Comundoiwilla v. Evans Doc. 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 LAMAVIS A. COMUNDOIWILLA, 10 11 CASE NO. 1:04-cv-06721-LJO-SKO PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. (Doc. 33) 12 M.S. EVANS, et al., 13 Defendants. / 14 15 Plaintiff Lamavis A. Comundoiwilla (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and 16 in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred 17 to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 18 On April 27, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendations which 19 recommended that Plaintiff’s First Amendment claims, Fourteenth Amendment due process claims, 20 and RLUIPA claims against Defendant Liles be dismissed. (Doc #33.) The Findings and 21 Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to 22 the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30) days of date on which they 23 were served. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 305, this Court 25 has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court 26 finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 27 Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that: 28 1. The April 27, 2010 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED in full; 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2. 2 RLUIPA claims against Defendant Liles are DISMISSED; and 3 3. 4 5 Plaintiff’s First Amendment claims, Fourteenth Amendment due process claims, and Defendant Liles is DISMISSED from this action. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: b9ed48 June 4, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.