(PC) Stevenson v. Kellums et al, No. 1:2010cv01401 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER adopting 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; dismissing Defendants O. Perales and A.L. Reyes and ordering Defendant B. Kellums to file a responsive pleading to Plaintiff's complaint signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 5/24/2011. (Filing Deadline: 6/27/2011). (Lundstrom, T)
Download PDF
(PC) Stevenson v. Kellums et al Doc. 16 1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 STEVIE STEVENSON, 9 10 11 CASE NO. 1:10-CV-01401-OWW-DLB PC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS v. B. KELLUMS, et al., 12 (DOC. 15) Defendants. 13 DEFENDANT KELLUMS’S RESPONSE DUE WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS / 14 15 Plaintiff Stevie Stevenson (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se in this 16 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s complaint 17 against Defendants B. Kellums, O. Perales, and A. L. Reyes. The matter was referred to a United 18 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On April 25, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations which was 20 served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objection to the Findings and 21 Recommendations was to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party filed a timely Objection to the 22 Findings and Recommendations. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court has conducted a de 24 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 25 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 26 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 27 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed April 25, 2011, is adopted in full; 28 2. Defendants Perales and Reyes are dismissed from this action without prejudice for 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 violation of Rule 20(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; 3. This action proceed on Plaintiff’s complaint against Defendant B. Kellums for 3 retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and excessive force in violation of the 4 Eighth Amendment; 5 4. 6 7 8 9 10 Plaintiff’s other claims against Defendant Kellums are dismissed for failure to state a claim; and 5. Defendant B. Kellums is granted thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order in which to file a responsive pleading to Plaintiff’s complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 24, 2011 emm0d6 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2