(PC) Dennis v. Doser et al, No. 1:2022cv00818 - Document 19 (E.D. Cal. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 17 Findings and Recommendations signed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 8/2/2023. (Lundstrom, T)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MATTHEW DENNIS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 Case No. 1:22-cv-00818-JLT-HBK (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. (Doc. 17) GENE DOSER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Matthew Dennis is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 18 this civil rights complaint under 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 Local Rule 302. On June 26, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 20 21 served on Plaintiff and contained notice that objections were to be filed within fourteen days. 22 (Doc. 17.) The magistrate judge recommended that Plaintiff proceed only in his Eighth 23 Amendment excessive use of force claim against Defendants Doser, Dinnis, and Swanson, and all 24 other claims and Defendants be dismissed. (Id. at 1.) Plaintiff filed a Response on July 20, 2023 25 stating that he “does not disagree with this Courts [sic] Order dated June 26, 2023” and agrees to 26 proceed only on the excessive force claims against Defendants Doser, Dinnis and Swanson. (Doc. 27 18 at 1.) 28 /// 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the 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 ORDERED: 5 1. 6 7 The findings and recommendations, filed on June 26, 2023, (Doc. 17) are ADOPTED IN FULL. 2. The case is remanded to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 2, 2023 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.
