(PC) Lugo v. Fisher, et al., No. 1:2019cv00039 - Document 25 (E.D. Cal. 2019)
Court Description: ORDER adopting Findings and Recommendations regarding dismissal of certain claims 24 signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 9/3/2019. (Lundstrom, T)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Lugo v. Fisher, et al. Doc. 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEITH ROBERT LUGO, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 R. FISHER, et al., 15 Case No. 1:19-cv-00039-LJO-SAB (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN CLAIMS (ECF No. 24) Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Keith Robert Lugo is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 18 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 15, 2019, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations 21 that this action proceed on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint against Defendants Mayfield, 22 Caitlan, and Angelina for interference with mail in violation of the First Amendment, and that all 23 other claims be dismissed. (ECF No. 24.) The findings and recommendations were served on 24 Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within thirty (30) days 25 after service. (Id. at 9.) More than thirty days have passed since the findings and 26 recommendations were served, and no objections have been filed. 27 28 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper 2 analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. 5 6 The findings and recommendations issued on July 15, 2019, (ECF No. 24), are adopted in full; 2. This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed on July 3, 7 2019, (ECF No. 23), against Defendants Mayfield, Caitlan, and Angelina for 8 interference with mail in violation of the First Amendment; 9 3. Plaintiff’s official capacity and access to the court claims are dismissed from this 10 action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state claims upon which relief may be granted; 11 and 12 4. 13 This action is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings consistent with this order. 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 Dated: 16 September 3, 2019 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ UNITED STATES CHIEF 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.
