(PC) Williams v. Garza et al, No. 1:2006cv01569 - Document 41 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 23 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DISMISSING Claims and Defendants signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 9/27/2010. Defendants Trimble, Fresno County Sheriff Investigation Division and Myers terminated. (Bradley, A)
Download PDF
(PC) Williams v. Garza et al Doc. 41 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 LUMPKIN WILLIAMS, 10 11 12 13 CASE NO. 1:06-cv-01569-AWI-SKO PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATIONS FINDINGS AND CLAIMS AND v. ORDER DISMISSING DEFENDANTS GARZA, et al., Defendants. (Doc. 23) / 14 15 Plaintiff Lumpkin Williams (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 16 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 17 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 18 On October 22, 2009, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendations which 19 recommended that certain claims be dismissed from this action. (Doc. #23.) Plaintiff’s second 20 amended complaint was screened on September 22, 2009. (Doc. #21.) Plaintiff was ordered to file 21 an amended complaint or to notify the Court that he wished to proceed only on the claims found to 22 be cognizable. On October 13, 2009, Plaintiff informed the Court that he wished to proceed only 23 on the claims found to be cognizable. (Doc. #22.) The Court then issued the October 22, 2009 24 Findings and Recommendations recommending the dismissal of Plaintiff’s other claims. 25 The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice to 26 Plaintiff that any objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30) 27 days of the date on which the Findings and Recommendations were served. Plaintiff did not file 28 objections to the Findings and Recommendations. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 305, this Court 2 has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court 3 finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that: 5 1. The October 22, 2009 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED in full; 6 2. Defendants Trimble, Myers, and the Fresno County Sheriff’s Investigative Division 7 8 are DISMISSED from this action; 3. 9 10 Plaintiff’s claims regarding the denial of medical care and the failure to report a use of excessive force incident are DISMISSED; and 4. This actions shall proceed on Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Cantu, Dutra, 11 Garza, Lantz, Huckabay, and Mendoza for the use of excessive force in violation of 12 Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 Dated: 0m8i78 September 27, 2010 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2