(PC) Loureiro, Jr. v. Santoro et al, No. 1:2021cv01599 - Document 19 (E.D. Cal. 2022)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 18 Findings and Recommendations; ORDERED that this action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for proceedings consistent with this order,signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 09/8/2022; (Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 RONALD W. F. JOSHUA LOUREIRO, JR., Plaintiff, 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 v. SANTORO, et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-01599-AWI-BAM (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS (ECF No. 18) Defendants. Plaintiff Ronald W. F. Joshua Loureiro, Jr. (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 8, 2022, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations 20 recommending that this action proceed on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed May 5, 2022, 21 (ECF No. 16), against Defendant John Doe hearing officer for denial of due process in violation 22 of the Fourteenth Amendment for the disciplinary hearing, on or about March 18, 2021, regarding 23 the Rules Violation Report (Logged #0000007065425, dated 2/25/21) at North Kern State Prison. 24 (ECF No. 18.) The Magistrate Judge further recommended that all other claims and defendants 25 be dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state claims upon which relief may be 26 granted. (Id.) The findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice 27 that any objections were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 11.) No 28 objections have been filed, and the deadline to do so has expired. 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 2 de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the 3 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 5 1. The findings and recommendations issued on June 8, 2022, (ECF No. 18), are adopted 6 7 in full; 2. This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed May 5, 2022, 8 (ECF No. 16), against Defendant John Doe hearing officer for denial of due process in 9 violation of the Fourteenth Amendment; 10 11 12 13 3. All other claims and all other defendants are dismissed from this action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; and 4. This action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for proceedings consistent with this order. 14 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 8, 2022 SENIOR 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.