United States District Court, Eastern District of California
December 23, 2014
BRADY K. ARMSTRONG, Plaintiff,
D. PELAYO, Defendant.
ORDER (1) ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, (2) DISMISSING ALL CLAIMS EXCEPT RETALIATION CLAIM, AND (3) REFERRFNG MATTER TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS (Docs. 36 and 42)
Plaintiff Brady K. Armstrong, a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on July 8, 2013. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302; and on October 9, 2014, the Magistrate Judge screened Plaintiffs amended complaint and issued a Findings and Recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Plaintiff was provided with twenty days within which to file an Objection, but he did not object. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, F.3d __, __, No. 11-17911, 2014 WL 6435497, at *3 (9th Cir. Nov. 18, 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).
Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of this case, and it finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on October 9, 2014, is adopted in full;
2. This action shall proceed against Defendant Pelayo for damages on Plaintiffs First Amendment retaliation claim arising out of events on October 4, 2012;
3. All other claims, including Plaintiffs Eighth Amendment excessive force claim, Eighth Amendment medical care claim, and ADA claim, are dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim;
4. Plaintiffs claims for declaration and injunctive relief are dismissed as moot; and
5. This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge to initiate service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.