(PC) Allred v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation et al, No. 1:2016cv01571 - Document 10 (E.D. Cal. 2017)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 9 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Finding Service of the Complaint appropriate as to Defendants Duroy, Johnson, Moss and Martinez, DISMISSING all other claims and defendants and Referring the matter back to the Magistrate Judge for initiation of service of process, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 05/24/2017. (Martin-Gill, S)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF ) CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, ) et al., ) Defendants. ) ) JESSE D. ALLRED, 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Case No.: 1:16-cv-01571-LJO-SAB (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, FINDING SERVICE OF THE COMPLAINT APPROPRIATE AS TO DEFENDANTS DUROY, JOHNSON, MOSS AND MARTINEZ, DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS AND REFERRING THE MATTER BACK TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR INITIATION OF SERVICE OF PROCESS [ECF Nos. 1, 9] Plaintiff Jesse D. Allred is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 20 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 Recommendations recommending that this action proceed against Defendants Duroy, Johnson, Moss 22 and Martinez for deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and all other claims 23 and Defendants be dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. The 24 Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that objections were to 25 be filed within fourteen days. Over fourteen days have passed and no objections were filed. On May 1, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and 26 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de 27 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 28 Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on May 1, 2017, are adopted in full; 3 2. This action shall proceed against Defendants Duroy, Johnson, Moss and Martinez for 4 5 6 7 deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment; 3. All other claims and Defendants are dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief; and 4. The matter is referred back the Magistrate Judge for initiation of service of process. 8 9 10 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ May 24, 2017 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
