(PC) Kawamoto v. Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation, et al., No. 1:2011cv01308 - Document 43 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING IN PART, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DENYING IN PART, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 22 , 40 , signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 7/9/14. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 DARREN KAWAMOTO, 13 14 15 16 Case No. 1:11-cv-01308-LJO-MJS (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING, IN PART, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING, IN PART, DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, et al., ECF Nos. 22 and 40 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff Darren Kawamoto, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 19 filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on August 8, 2011. The matter was 20 referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 21 Rule 302. 22 On March 31, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued a findings and recommendations 23 recommending that Defendants’ motion to dismisss be denied. (ECF No. 40.) Defendants filed 24 objections on April 9, 2014. (ECF No. 41.) 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 26 Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 27 28 Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 1 1 analysis. However, the Magistrate Judge’s order recommended that the Defendant’s motion to 2 dismiss be denied entirely when its analysis indicated that the motion should be granted in part 3 and denied in part. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed March 31, 2014, are adopted in part; 6 2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 22) is granted in part and denied in part; 7 3. Plaintiff shall proceed with his claims for damages pursuant to the Americans 8 with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act against the California Department 9 of Corrections and the remaining Defendants in their official capacities; 10 4. Plaintiff shall proceed with his Equal Protection claim for damages against all the 11 Defendants in their individual capacities except the California Department of 12 Corrections and Rehabilitation; and 13 5. Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief are dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill July 9, 2014 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 6. 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.