(PC) Adams v. Yates et al, No. 1:2010cv00671 - Document 36 (E.D. Cal. 2012)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that Certain Claims and Defendants be DISMISSED re 33 Second Amended Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 11/28/2012. Referred to Judge Ishii. Objections to F&R due within fourteen (14) days. (Jessen, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Adams v. Yates et al Doc. 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICKEY ADAMS, 1:10-cv-0671-AWI-MJS (PC) 12 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN OF PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS Plaintiff, 13 v. (ECF Nos. 34 & 35) 14 15 J. YATES, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 _____________________________/ 18 Plaintiff Rickey Adams (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil 19 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 On August 30, 2012, after reviewing Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint, the 21 Court ordered Plaintiff to either file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his 22 willingness to proceed only on his post-November 2008 First Amendment retaliation claim 23 against Defendants Erickson, Rumbles, and Brumbaugh. (ECF No. 34.) On September 24 24, 2012, Plaintiff notified the Court of his willingness to forgo a third amended complaint 25 and proceed with his post-2008 First Amendment retaliation claim. (ECF No. 35.) 26 Accordingly, all claims and Defendants in Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint, 27 except for his post-November 2008 First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants 28 Erickson, Rumbles, and Brumbaugh, should now be dismissed. -1Dockets.Justia.com 1 The Court hereby RECOMMENDS the following: 2 1. retaliation claim against Defendants Erickson, Rumbles, and Brumbaugh; 3 4 2. Plaintiff’s pre-November 2008 First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Erickson, Rumbles, and Brumbaugh be dismissed; 5 6 Plaintiff be allowed to proceed on his post-November 2008 First Amendment 3. Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment due process claim regarding prison 7 grievance procedures against Defendants Yates, Huckabay, and Grannis be 8 dismissed; 9 4. Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment due process claim regarding false rules 10 violation reports against Defendants Erickson, Rumbles, and Brumbaugh be 11 dismissed; 12 5. Brumbaugh, Huckabay, Grannis, and Hubbard be dismissed; and 13 14 15 16 Plaintiff’s conspiracy claim against Defendants Yates, Erickson, Rumbles, 6. Defendants Yates, Huckabay, Grannis, and Hubbard be dismissed from the action. These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District 17 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 18 Within fourteen (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, 19 any party may file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Such 20 a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and 21 Recommendations." The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the 22 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Y1 st, 23 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 24 25 26 27 IT IS SO ORDERED. 28 Dated: November 28, 2012 /s/ -2- Michael J. Seng 1 ci4d6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3-
]]>
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.
