(PC) Nielsen v. Lopez, No. 1:2014cv01608 - Document 30 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting 28 Findings and Recommendations for Dismissal of Certain of Plaintiff's Claims and Defendants and to Deny As Moot 16 Plaintiff's Motion for Interlocutory Appeal, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 10/6/15. (Gonzalez, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 LARRY NIELSEN, CASE NO. 1:14-cv-01608-AWI-MJS (PC) 13 15 16 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN OF PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS AND TO DENY AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL Plaintiff, 14 v. JOSE LOPEZ, et al., Defendants. 17 (Docs. 28 & 16) 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 19 rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Docs. 1 & 8.) The matter was 20 referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and 21 Local Rule 302 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. 22 On August 28, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and 23 Recommendations (Doc. 28) that (1) Plaintiff should proceed on the excessive force 24 claim against Defendant Lopez, (2) all other claims asserted in the Complaint and all 25 other named Defendants should be dismissed, and (3) Plaintiff’s motion for interlocutory 26 appeal (Doc. 16) should be denied as moot. Plaintiff did not object to the Findings and 27 Recommendations and the time for doing so has passed. 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 28), filed on August 28, 2015, is adopted in full; 2. Plaintiff is to proceed on the excessive force claim against Defendant Lopez and Plaintiff’s motion for interlocutory appeal (Doc. 16) is denied as moot; and 3. All other claims asserted in the Complaint and all other named Defendants are dismissed with prejudice. 12 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 6, 2015 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 16 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.