(PC) Rivas v. Williams, et al., No. 1:2019cv00328 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2020)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 14 Findings and Recommendations and Dismissing Certain Claims signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/7/2020. (Rivera, O)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL JUARIQUE RIVAS, 12 13 14 15 No. 1:19-cv-00328-DAD-BAM (PC) Plaintiff, v. WILLIAMS, et al., Defendant. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS (Doc. No. 14) 16 17 18 Plaintiff Daniel Juarique Rivas is a state prisoner appearing pro se in this civil rights 19 action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States 20 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On February 28, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 22 recommendations recommending that this action proceed only on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment 23 deliberate indifference claims against defendants Williams and Campos and that his remaining 24 claims be dismissed for failure to state cognizable claims. (Doc. No. 14.) The findings and 25 recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that objections were due within 26 fourteen days. (Id. at 7.) On March 9, 2020, plaintiff notified the court of his willingness to 27 proceed only on the claims found by the magistrate judge to be cognizable, and that he “elects to 28 raise no objections” to the findings and recommendations. (Doc. No. 15 at 1.) 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 2 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 3 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, 5 1. 6 7 in full; 2. 8 9 3. 14 15 All other claims and defendants are dismissed from this action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief; and 4. 12 13 This action now proceeds only on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claims against defendants Williams and Campos; 10 11 The February 28, 2020 findings and recommendations (Doc. No. 14) are adopted This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 7, 2020 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.