(PC) Rivas v. Adonis et al, No. 1:2010cv02302 - Document 21 (E.D. Cal. 2012)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 20 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING Claim Against Defendant Brown and Referring Matter Back to Magistrate Judge to Initiate Service of Process on Defendant Adonis signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 11/28/2012. E. Brown terminated. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
(PC) Rivas v. Adonis et al Doc. 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ELMER ANDRES RIVAS, CASE NO. 1:10-cv-2302-AWI-SKO (PC) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT BROWN, AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE TO INITIATE SERVICE OF PROCESS ON DEFENDANT ADONIS 12 v. 13 M. ADONIS, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 (Docs. 19 and 20) 16 / 17 Plaintiff Elmer Andres Rivas, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed 18 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 10, 2010. The matter was referred 19 to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On September 27, 2012, the Magistrate Judge screened Plaintiff’s second amended complaint 21 and recommended that this action proceed on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant 22 Adonis and that Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Brown be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The 23 thirty-day deadline to file objections has expired and Plaintiff did not object or otherwise respond 24 to the findings and recommendations. 25 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. 26 Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be 27 supported by the record and by proper analysis. 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. 3 4 in full; 2. 5 6 This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed on January 3, 2012, against Defendant Adonis for violation of the Eighth Amendment; 3. 7 8 The Court adopts the findings and recommendations filed on September 27, 2012, Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Brown is dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim under section 1983; and 4. This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge to initiate service of process. 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 Dated: 0m8i78 November 28, 2012 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.