(PC) Gonzales v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al, No. 1:2019cv01467 - Document 15 (E.D. Cal. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 12/15/2020 ADOPTING 14 Findings and Recommendations regarding dismissal of certain claims and Defendants.(Lundstrom, T)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 GIOVANNI GONZALES (aka Sharon Gonzales), Plaintiff, 13 14 15 16 17 v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-01467-AWI-BAM (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS (ECF No. 14) Defendants. 18 Plaintiff Giovanni Gonzales, aka Sharon Gonzales (“Plaintiff”), is a state prisoner 19 proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 21 § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 22 On April 13, 2020, the assigned Magistrate Judge screened Plaintiff’s first amended 23 complaint and found that Plaintiff stated cognizable claims against Defendants Diaz, Song, 24 Mitchell, and DOES 1–50 in their official capacities for purposes of injunctive relief, for 25 deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment, 26 and for discrimination based on Plaintiff’s transgender status under the Fourteenth Amendment’s 27 Equal Protection Clause, but failed to state any other cognizable claims against any other 28 defendants. (ECF No. 14.) The Magistrate Judge recommended that the action proceed on those 1 1 claims found cognizable, and all other claims and defendants be dismissed from this action for 2 failure to state claims upon which relief may be granted. The findings and recommendations 3 were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen 4 (14) days after service. (Id. at 14–15.) No objections have been filed, and the deadline to do so 5 has expired. 6 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 7 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the 8 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 9 10 11 12 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations issued on April 13, 2020 (ECF No. 14) are adopted in full; 2. This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed March 24, 2020 13 (ECF No. 12) against Defendants Diaz, Song, Mitchell and DOES 1–50 in their 14 official capacities for purposes of injunctive relief, for deliberate indifference to 15 Plaintiff’s serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and for 16 discrimination based on Plaintiff’s transgender status under the Fourteenth 17 Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause; 18 19 20 21 3. All other claims and defendants are dismissed based on Plaintiff’s failure to state claims upon which relief may be granted; and 4. This action is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings consistent with this order. 22 23 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 15, 2020 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
