Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Demerson v. Warden of Satf

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


November 3, 2010

EDWARD DEMERSON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WARDEN OF SATF, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS FROM SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE TO INITIATE SERVICE OF PROCESS (Docs. 56 and 66)

Plaintiff Edward Demerson, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On September 1, 2010, the Magistrate Judge screened Plaintiff's second amended complaint and issued a findings and recommendations recommended dismissal of certain claims and parties. After obtaining an extension of time, Plaintiff filed a timely objection on November 1, 2010.*fn1

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed September 1, 2010, is adopted in full;

2. This action shall proceed on Plaintiff's second amended complaint, filed June 2, 2009, against Defendants Curtiss, Renya, and Morgan on Plaintiff's excessive force claim; and against Defendants Curtiss, Renya, and Reynoso on Plaintiff's failure-to-protect claim;

3. Plaintiff's due process, conspiracy, retaliation, and medical care claims are dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim;

4. Defendants Woodford, Grannis, Adams, Clark, Hense, Diaz, Wan, Alva, Gallagher, Pineda, Odle, Davis, Munoz, Padilla, and Hernandez are dismissed based on Plaintiff's failure to state any claims against them; and

5. This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge to initiate service of process proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.