(PC) Thompson v. Gomez et al, No. 1:2018cv00125 - Document 12 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 10 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants, and Referring the Matter Back to Magistrate Judge for Initiation of Service of Process signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 4/2/2018. (Jessen, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARK SHANE THOMPSON, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. A. GOMEZ, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:18-cv-00125-LJO-SAB (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS, AND REFERRING THE MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR INITIATION OF SERVICE OF PROCESS [ECF Nos. 8, 9, 10] Plaintiff Mark Shane Thompson is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 On February 12, 2018, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that it stated a 20 cognizable claim against Defendants A. Gomez, E. Weiss, Y. Sazo, C. Gray, J. Busby, Rodriguez, and 21 J. Doe Nos 1 and 2 for excessive force only. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff was granted an opportunity to 22 amend his complaint, or notify the Court that he is agreeable to proceeding only on the excessive force 23 identified as cognizable. (Id.) 24 25 On March 5, 2018, Plaintiff notified the Court that he wished to proceed only on the excessive force and dismiss all other claims. (ECF No. 9.) 26 Therefore, on March 6, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that 27 this action proceed on Plaintiff’s excessive force claim against Defendants A. Gomez, E. Weiss, Y. 28 Sazo, C. Gray, J. Busby, Rodriguez, and J. Doe Nos 1 and 2, and all other claims and Defendants be 1 1 dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. (ECF No. 10.) The 2 Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that objections were to 3 be filed within fourteen (14) days. (Id.) No objections have been filed and the time period to do has 4 expired. 5 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the 6 undersigned has conducted a de novo review of plaintiff’s case. The undersigned concludes the 7 Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 8 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 9 1. The March 6, 2018 Findings and Recommendations are adopted in full; 10 2. This action shall proceed against Defendants A. Gomez, E. Weiss, Y. Sazo, C. Gray, J. 11 12 13 14 Busby, Rodriguez, and J. Doe Nos 1 and 2 for excessive force; 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 to the Magistrate Judge for initiation of service of process. 15 16 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ April 2, 2018 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
