(PC) Avina v. Crondagar et al, No. 1:2009cv00343 - Document 18 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER Adopting FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS And Dismissing Certain Claims And Defendants (Docs. 14 , 17 ), signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 6/16/2010. It is ORDERED that: The Findings and Recommendations, filed May 14, 2010, is adopted in full. This action proceed on Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, filed October 29, 2009, against Defendants Cronjager, Lunes, Ruff, Roman, and Fisher for violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and against Def endants Cronjager and Lunes for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment. Defendants Dotson, Fields, Castillo, Ortiz, the Director of CDCR Doe 1, Lopez, Moore, Garcia, Recorder Doe 2, and Does 3 to 6 are dismissed from this action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Scrivner, E)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Avina v. Crondagar et al Doc. 18 1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 JOSE AVINA, 9 10 11 CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00343-LJO-DLB PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS v. J. CRONJAGAR, et al., (Docs. 14, 17) Defendants. 12 / 13 14 Plaintiff Jose Avina (“plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil 15 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 16 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 17 On May 14, 2010, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations herein which 18 was served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objection to the Findings and 19 Recommendations was to be filed within thirty days. Plaintiff filed an Objection to the Findings and 20 Recommendations on June 11, 2010. 21 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court has conducted a de 22 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 23 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 25 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed May 14, 2010, is adopted in full; 26 2. This action proceed on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed October 29, 2009, 27 against Defendants Cronjager, Lunes, Ruff, Roman, and Fischer for violation of the 28 Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and against Defendants Cronjager 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 and Lunes for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment; and 2 3. Defendants Dotson, Fields, Castillo, Ortiz, the Director of CDCR Doe 1, Lopez, 3 Moore, Garcia, Recorder Doe 2, and Does 3 to 6 are dismissed from this action for 4 failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 5 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: b9ed48 June 16, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
