Gradford v. Gray, No. 1:2022cv01304 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 14 Findings and Recommendations Recommending Dismissing Certain Claims, signed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 4/20/2023. The matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. (Rivera, O)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM J. GRADFORD, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 ANDY GRAY, 15 Case No. 1:22-cv-01304-JLT-SAB ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS (Docs. 14, 15) Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff William Gradford, a state prisoner (BR-7892) proceeding pro se and in forma 18 pauperis, initiated this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on October 13, 2022, 19 against Defendant Officer Andy Gray. (Doc. 1.) This matter was referred to a United States 20 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 Plaintiff’s complaint was screened and found to state a cognizable claim. (Doc. 11.) 22 Plaintiff was ordered to either file a first amended complaint or notice of intent to proceed on the 23 cognizable claim within thirty days. (Id. at 14.) On March 17, 2023, Plaintiff filed a notice 24 stating that he wished to proceed on the cognizable claim. (Doc. 12.) The assigned magistrate 25 judge entered findings and recommendations that this action proceed on Plaintiff’s retaliation 26 claim against Defendant Gray, and that all other claims be dismissed for failure to state a claim. 27 (Doc. 14.) On March 31, 2023, Plaintiff filed “objections to the findings and recommendations,” 28 1 1 but the filing appears to indicate Plaintiff would like to proceed on the claim found cognizable by 2 the magistrate judge. (Doc. 15.) 3 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a de novo review of the 4 case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that the magistrate judge’s 5 findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 6 Accordingly, 7 1. 8 9 The findings and recommendations entered on March 22, 2023 (Doc. 14) are ADOPTED IN FULL. 2. 10 This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s retaliation claim against Defendant Gray based on extending his probation. 11 3. All other claims are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim. 12 4. The matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 20, 2023 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.