(PC) Puckett v. Barrios et al, No. 1:2020cv01405 - Document 18 (E.D. Cal. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 16 Findings and Recommendations Regarding Dismissal of Certain Claims and Defendants, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/5/2021. This action is referred back to the magistrate judge for proceedings consistent with this order. (Rivera, O)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DURRELL ANTHONY PUCKETT, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 BARRIOS, et al., 15 16 17 18 19 No. 1:20-cv-01405-NONE-BAM (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS Defendants. (Doc. No. 16) Plaintiff Durrell Anthony Puckett is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 13, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s first amended 20 complaint and issued findings and recommendations that this action proceed on claims for 21 excessive force for alleged sexual assault in violation of the Eighth Amendment against 22 defendants Barrios, P. Rodriguez, Gomez, I. Rodriguez, Hurd, Amezcua, Lopez-Maldonado, and 23 Woodward and for failure to intervene in violation of the Eighth Amendment against defendants 24 Holland, Jones, and John Does 1–4. (Doc. No. 16.) The magistrate judge further recommended 25 that all other claims and defendants be dismissed from this action based on plaintiff’s failure to 26 state claims upon which relief may be granted. (Id.) The findings and recommendations were 27 served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen (14) 28 days after service. (Id. at 8–9.) No objections have been filed, and the deadline to do so has 1 1 expired. 2 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 3 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings 4 and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, 6 1. The findings and recommendations issued on January 13, 2021, (Doc. No. 16), are 7 8 adopted in full; 2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed December 15, 9 2020, (Doc. No. 15), against defendants Barrios, P. Rodriguez, Gomez, I. Rodriguez, 10 Hurd, Amezcua, Lopez-Maldonado, and Woodward for excessive force for alleged 11 sexual assault in violation of the Eighth Amendment and defendants Holland, Jones, 12 and John Does 1–4 for failure to intervene in violation of the Eighth Amendment; 13 3. All other claims are dismissed from this action for failure to state a claim upon which 14 15 relief may be granted; and 4. This action is referred back to the magistrate judge for proceedings consistent with this 16 order. 17 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 5, 2021 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
