(PC) Hammler v. Lyons et al, No. 1:2019cv01650 - Document 25 (E.D. Cal. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 24 Findings and Recommendations in Full; Order for This Action to Proceed Only Against Defendant Lucas for Retaliation and Violation of Freedom of Speech Under the First Amendment, and Dismissing All Other Claims and Defendants, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 12/4/2020. (Marrujo, C)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALLEN HAMMLER, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 vs. J. LYONS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 1:19-cv-01650-AWI-GSA-PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL (ECF No. 24.) ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO PROCEED ONLY AGAINST DEFENDANT LUCAS FOR RETALIATION AND VIOLATION OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT, AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE IN 14 DAYS 18 19 Allen Hammler (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 20 with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 The matter was referred to a United 21 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 22 On November 4, 2020, the court entered findings and recommendations, recommending 23 that this action proceed only against defendant A. Lucas (Appeals Coordinator) for retaliation 24 and violation of freedom of speech, under the First Amendment, and that all other claims and 25 defendants be dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 26 24.) 27 recommendations. (Id.) The fourteen-day time period has expired, and no objections have been 28 filed. Plaintiff was granted fourteen days in which to file objections to the findings and 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the matter. 2 The court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper 3 analysis. 4 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 5 1. 6 7 The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on November 4, 2020, are ADOPTED in full; 2. This action now proceeds with Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, filed on 8 April 3, 2019, against defendant A. Lucas (Appeals Coordinator) for retaliation 9 and violation of freedom of speech, in violation of the First Amendment; 10 3. 11 12 All other claims and defendants are dismissed from this action for Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983; 4. Plaintiff’s claims for violation of the prison appeals process, denial of access to 13 courts, conspiracy, and violation of equal protection are dismissed from this action 14 based on Plaintiff’s failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted; 15 5. 16 17 18 Defendant Gonzales is dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state any claims against him or her upon which relief may be granted; and 6. This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings, including initiation of service of process. 19 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 4, 2020 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
