Williams v. The People of the State of California et al, No. 1:2022cv00532 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2022)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 5 Findings and Recommendations in Full ; ORDER DISMISSING Action for Failure to State a Cognizable Claim, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 06/3/2022.CASE CLOSED(Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CLIFTON WILLIAMS, JR., Plaintiff, 12 13 14 Case No. 1:22-cv-00532-AWI-SAB ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL, AND DISMISSING ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM v. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., (ECF No. 1, 5, 7) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Clifton Williams, Jr. (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this 18 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Eastern District of California Local 20 Rule 302. 21 On May 6, 2022, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, 22 recommending that this action be dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to state a cognizable claim. 23 (ECF No. 5.) Plaintiff was granted fourteen days in which to file objections to the findings and 24 recommendations, and on May 16, 2022, Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and 25 recommendations. (ECF No. 7.) 26 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Eastern District of 27 California Local Rule 304, this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having 28 carefully reviewed the entire file, including the filed objections, the Court concludes that the 1 1 findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. 2022 (ECF No. 5), are ADOPTED in full; and 4 5 The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on May 6, 2. This action is DISMISSED for failure to state a cognizable claim. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: June 3, 2022 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 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.