UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION
March 12, 2010
JOHN W. WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF,
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Phillip S. Gutierrez United States District Judge
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the entire record in this action, the attached Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge ("Report"), and the objections thereto. Good cause appearing, the Court concurs with and adopts the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations contained in the Report after having made a de novo determination of the portions to which objections were directed.
IT IS ORDERED that: (1) defendants Gamboa, Espinoza, Davis, Sears, and Richards in their individual capacities are dismissed with prejudice; (2) defendants Haws, Cash, Buechter, Cox, Mora, Esquivas, Gamboa, Salcedo, Gant, Espinoza, Gaines, Olmeda, Lee, Marquez, Arroyo, Davis, Sears, and Richards in their official capacities are dismissed with prejudice; (3) the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is dismissed with prejudice; (4) those portions of Claims One, Two, and Three that purport to state claims relating to interference with Plaintiff's grievances are dismissed with prejudice; (5) that portion of Claim Two that purports to state a claim for retaliatory housing reassignment is dismissed without prejudice; (6) those portions of Claims Two and Four that purport to state claims against defendant Cox for falsely charging Plaintiff with rule violations are dismissed with prejudice; and (7) those portions of Claim Three that purport to state a claim based on a deliberate indifference to medical needs are dismissed with prejudice.
Plaintiff is permitted to effect service of process on defendants Salcedo, Gant, Cox, Arroyo, Gaines, Olmeda, Lee, Marquez, Mora, Esquives, Haws, Cash and Buechter in their individual capacities only.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.