(PC) Torres v. Gipson et al, No. 1:2016cv01525 - Document 47 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 38 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER GRANTING 26 Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss, this action shall proceed only on Plaintiffs claims for First Amendment retaliation against Defendants Smith, Prince, Henderson, Mayo, Galaviz, and Weaver, all other claims and Defendants are DISMISSED; ORDER GRANTING 45 Motion for Extension; Case to Remain Open, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 8/13/2018. (Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 JUAN MATIAS TORRES, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 14 CASE NO. 1:16-cv-01525-LJO-JLT (PC) ORDER v. (1) ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION IN FULL; CONNIE GIPSON, et al., (2) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS Defendants. 15 16 (ECF Nos. 26, 38, 45) 17 CASE TO REMAIN OPEN 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant 20 to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On April 16, 2018, the previously-assigned magistrate judge filed findings and 22 recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any 23 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has 24 filed objections, and Defendants have filed a response. Plaintiff has also filed a request for extension 25 26 27 28 of time to file a sur-reply (ECF No. 45) and the sur-reply itself. Plaintiff’s request will be granted. 1 The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported 2 by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED 3 that: 4 1. Plaintiff’s June 20, 2018, motion for extension of time (ECF No. 45) is granted; 5 2. The findings and recommendations filed April 16, 2018 (ECF No. 38), are adopted in 6 full; 7 3. Defendants’ partial motion to dismiss (ECF No. 26) is GRANTED. The action shall 8 proceed only on Plaintiff’s claims for First Amendment retaliation against Defendants 9 Smith, Prince, Henderson, Mayo, Galaviz, and Weaver for approving Plaintiff’s transfer 10 to Pelican Bay in retaliation for Plaintiff’s protected First Amendment activity of filing 11 a prison grievance. All other claims and Defendants are dismissed. 12 4. Case to remain open. 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ August 13, 2018 UNITED STATES CHIEF 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.