(PC) Acinelli v. Baniga et al, No. 1:2015cv01616 - Document 39 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 30 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL; ORDER Dismissing Certain Claims and Defendants; and ORDER Directing Clerk of Court to Assign Action Entirely to Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 6/8/2018. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
(PC) Acinelli v. Baniga et al Doc. 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 SAMUEL A. ACINELLI, 10 11 12 Plaintiff, vs. ULYSSES VILLAMIL BANIGA, et al., 13 Defendant. 14 15 Old Case No. 1:15-cv-01616 AWI-JDP (PC) New Case No. 1:15-cv-1616 JDP (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS NONCOGNIZABLE CLAIMS AND ORDER REASSINGING MATTER DUE TO CONSENTS (ECF No. 30) Samuel A. Acinelli (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 16 pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. The matter was referred to 17 a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 18 On April 9, 2018, the Magistrate Judge entered findings and recommendations that this 19 case proceed on Plaintiff’s cognizable claim against Defendants Baniga and Hill for violation 20 of the Eighth Amendment and against Defendant Baniga for negligent infliction of emotional 21 distress, ordinary negligence, and medical malpractice. (ECF No. 30 at 16.) The Magistrate 22 Judge further recommended that all other claims and all other defendants be dismissed with 23 prejudice. (Id.) The parties were provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and 24 recommendations. No objections were filed. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 26 Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, 27 the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper 28 analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Additionally, the Plaintiff and the remaining Defendants have each consented to 2 Magistrate Judge jurisdiction over this case. See Doc. Nos. 4, 19. Because all parties to this 3 action have voluntarily consented to have a Magistrate Judge conduct any and all further 4 proceedings in the case, including the trial and entry of a final judgment, it is appropriate to 5 reassign this matter to the Magistrate Judge. 6 7 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 8 1. The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on April 9, 2018, 9 10 (ECF No. 30), are ADOPTED in full; 2. This case shall proceed on Plaintiff’s cognizable claim against Defendants 11 Baniga and Hill for violation of the Eighth Amendment and against 12 Defendant Baniga for negligent infliction of emotional distress, ordinary 13 negligence, and medical malpractice; 14 3. All other claims and all other defendants are dismissed with prejudice; 15 4. This action is assigned to United States Magistrate Jeremy D. Peterson for all 16 purposes within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), to conduct any and all further 17 proceedings in the case, including the trial and entry of final judgment; 18 19 20 21 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to assign this action in its entirety to Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson; 6. Any future hearing dates set before the undersigned are VACATED and REASSIGNED to the calendar of Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson; and 22 7. The new case number for this matter shall be 1:15-cv-1616 JDP (PC), and the 23 parties shall use case number 1:15-cv-1616 JDP (PC) in all further filings. 24 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 8, 2018 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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.