(PC) Cranford v. Nickels, No. 1:2007cv01812 - Document 18 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 14 ), signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 9/21/2010. The Court ORDERS that: The July 29, 2010 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED in full; Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims are DISMISSED; and This action proceeds on Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claim against Defendant Nickels. (Scrivner, E)
Download PDF
(PC) Cranford v. Nickels Doc. 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 U N IT ED ST A T ES D IST RICT COU RT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 ARCHIE CRANFORD, 10 CASE NO. 1:07-cv-01812-LJO-SKO PC Plaintiff, 11 ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATIONS FINDINGS AND v. (Doc. 14) 12 CHRISTINA NICKELS, 13 Defendant. / 14 15 Plaintiff Archie Cranford (“Plaintiff”) is a civil detainee 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 July 29, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendations which 19 recommended that Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims be dismissed for failure to state a claim. 20 (Doc. 14.) The Magistrate Judge recommended that this action proceed on Plaintiff’s Fourteenth 21 Amendment claim against Defendant Nickels. The Findings and Recommendations were served on 22 Plaintiff and contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the Findings and Recommendations 23 were to be filed within thirty (30) days of the date on which the Findings and Recommendations 24 were served. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 305, this Court 26 has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court 27 finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 28 /// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that: 2 1. The July 29, 2010 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED in full; 3 2. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims are DISMISSED; and 4 3. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment claim against Defendant 5 Nickels. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: 66h44d September 21, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2