(PC) Guillen III v. Francisco et al, No. 1:2018cv00290 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DISMISSING Defendant Garza 12 , signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/21/2018: This matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. (Hellings, J)
Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARCOS CASEY GUILLEN III, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 1:18-cv-00290-DAD-SAB (PC) v. T. FRANCISCO, et al., 15 Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING DEFENDANT GARZA (Doc. No. 12) 16 Plaintiff Marcos Casey Guillen III is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 17 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 19 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On March 6, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s complaint and found 20 21 that plaintiff stated a cognizable claim against defendant officer T. Francisco for violation of 22 plaintiff’s rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, but did not state a 23 cognizable claim against defendant Warden Garza. (Doc. No. 8.) Plaintiff was granted leave to 24 file an amended complaint to attempt to cure the deficiency or file a notice of his intent to 25 proceed only on his claim against defendant Francisco. (Id. at 7.) On March 14, 2018, plaintiff 26 filed a notice that he wished to proceed only on his claim brought against defendant Francisco. 27 (Doc. No. 11.) 28 ///// 1 1 On March 15, 2018, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 2 recommending that this action proceed against defendant Francisco only for violation of the First 3 Amendment, and that defendant Garza be dismissed from the action. (Doc. No. 12.) The 4 findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections 5 were to be filed within fourteen days. (Id. at 2–3.) No objections were filed and the time for 6 doing so has expired. 7 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 8 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings 9 and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 10 11 12 Accordingly: 1. The findings and recommendations issued March 15, 2018 (Doc. No. 12) are adopted in full; 13 2. Defendant Garza is dismissed from this action; and 14 3. The matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. 15 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 21, 2018 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2