(PC) Turnbough v. Hernandez et al, No. 1:2017cv01465 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 13 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and Dismissing Certain Claims and Defendants signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/15/2018. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROGER TURNBOUGH, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 1:17-cv-01465-DAD-BAM v. Y. HERNANDEZ, et al., 15 Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS (Doc. No. 13) 16 17 Plaintiff Roger Turnbough is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 18 19 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff was incarcerated at the 20 time of the alleged events at issue in this action. 21 On July 30, 2018 the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s first amended 22 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and found that it stated a cognizable claim against defendant 23 Hernandez for failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Doc. No. 13.) The 24 magistrate judge recommended that all other claims and defendants be dismissed. The findings 25 and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto 26 were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 7.) To date, no objections to the 27 findings and recommendations have been filed, and the time in which to do so has now passed. 28 ///// 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 2 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings 3 and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, 5 1. 6 7 The findings and recommendations issued on July 30, 2018 (Doc. No. 13) are adopted in full; 2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed June 11, 8 2018, against defendant Hernandez for failure to intervene in violation of the 9 Eighth Amendment; 10 3. 11 12 failure to state claims upon which relief may be granted; and 4. 13 14 15 16 All other claims and defendants are dismissed, with prejudice, based on plaintiff’s This action is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 15, 2018 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.