Renteria v. Jimenez et al, No. 1:2015cv01191 - Document 12 (E.D. Cal. 2016)

Court Description: ORDER adopting in full 9 Findings and Recommendations signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/2/2016. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 JIMMY JACOB RENTERIA, Case No. 1:15-cv-01191- SMS 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 14 v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ADOLFO JIMENEZ, JOHN PIERRO, GUY TURNER, and DOES 1-10, 15 Defendants. 16 17 (Doc. 9) Plaintiff Jimmy Renteria, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis filed a 18 complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his rights under the United States 19 20 Constitution. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge under 28 U.S.C. § 21 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of 22 California. 23 24 25 On January 12, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations (F&R) that (1) Plaintiff proceed on the excessive force and deprivation of liberty claims against Defendants, and (2) that all other claims be dismissed with prejudice. Doc. 9. Plaintiff has since 26 filed a notice indicating that he does not object to the F&R and requests an order permitting service 27 28 of his surviving claims. Doc. 11. 1 1 Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. 2 Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be 3 supported by the record and by proper analysis. 4 5 6 7 8 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed on January 13, 2016, is adopted in full; 2. Plaintiff is to proceed on the excessive force and deprivation of liberty claims against Defendants; and 3. All other claims asserted in the Complaint are dismissed with prejudice. 9 10 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill March 2, 2016 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.