(PC) King v. Stane et al, No. 1:2017cv01660 - Document 17 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 14 Findings and Recommendations, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 8/1/18. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 LARRY DONNELL KING, 9 10 11 Plaintiff, Case No. 1:17-cv-01660-AWI-EPG (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. (ECF NOS. 1, 11, & 14) M. STANE, et al., 12 Defendants. 13 14 Larry King (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 15 this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 16 States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 17 On June 21, 2018, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and 18 recommendations, recommending “that all claims and defendants be dismissed, except for 19 Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment Devereaux claim and due process claim against defendant 20 Stane.” (ECF No. 14, p. 2). 21 Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and 22 recommendations. The deadline for filing objections has passed, and Plaintiff has not filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 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 2 3 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 1. The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on June 21, 2018, are ADOPTED in full; 4 2. All claims and defendants are dismissed, except for Plaintiff’s Fourteenth 5 Amendment Devereaux claim and due process claim against defendant Stane; 6 and 7 8 3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to reflect the dismissal of defendants P. Chanelo, C. Lesniak, and M. Phillips on the Court’s docket. 9 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 1, 2018 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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.