(PC) Beteta v. Gray, No. 2:2022cv00037 - Document 31 (E.D. Cal. 2022)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/17/2022 ADOPTING the 27 Findings and Recommendations in full. The 21 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and this action shall proceed only on plaintiff's claims against defendant in his individual capacity. This action is REFERRED back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings. (Spichka, K.)
Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE N. BETETA, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS GRAY, Defendant. (Doc. No. 21, 27) 16 17 No. 2:22-cv-00037-DAD-CKD (PC) Plaintiff Jose N. Beteta is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 18 civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On October 5, 2022, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 21 recommending that defendant’s unopposed motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claims against defendant 22 Gray in his official capacity (Doc. No. 21) be granted. (Doc. No. 27.) The pending findings and 23 recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections thereto 24 were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 2.) No objections have been filed, 25 and the time in which to do so has now passed. 26 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 27 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 28 findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 1 1 Accordingly, 2 1. 3 adopted in full; 4 2. 5 Defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claims against him in his official capacity (Doc. No. 21) is granted; 6 3. 7 This action shall proceed only on plaintiff’s claims against defendant in his individual capacity; and 8 4. 9 This action is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings. 10 11 The findings and recommendations issued on October 5, 2022 (Doc. No. 27) are IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 17, 2022 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.