(PC) Garrett v. Igbinosa, No. 1:2016cv00259 - Document 54 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 49 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS to Dismiss Non-Cognizable Claims signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 05/09/2018. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 JAMES JAMIL GARRETT, 10 11 12 Plaintiff, v. DR. NGOZI IGBINOSA, 13 Case No. 1:16-cv-00259-LJO-JDP (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS NON-COGNIZABLE CLAIMS (ECF No. 49) Defendant. 14 15 James Jamil Garrett (“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 3, 2018, Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng entered findings and 19 recommendations, recommending that this action continue to proceed only on Plaintiff’s Eighth 20 Amendment and First Amendment claims against Defendant Igbinosa; and that the remaining 21 Eighth Amendment claims be dismissed with prejudice. (ECF No. 49.) Plaintiff was given an 22 opportunity to object to the findings and recommendations. Plaintiff filed his objections on 23 April 18, 2018. (ECF No. 52.) 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 25 Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, 26 the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper 27 analysis. 28 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 2 1. 3 4 2018, (ECF No. 49), are ADOPTED IN FULL; 2. 5 6 The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on April 3, This action shall continue to proceed only on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment and First Amendment claims against Defendant Igbinosa; and 3. The remaining Eighth Amendment claims are dismissed with prejudice. 7 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ May 9, 2018 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 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.