Caputo v. Gonzales

Full title: BRIAN CAPUTO, Plaintiff, v. GONZALES, et al., Defendants.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Apr 25, 2018

Case No. 1:15-cv-01008-LJO-EPG (PC) (E.D. Cal. Apr. 25, 2018)

Opinion

Case No. 1:15-cv-01008-LJO-EPG (PC)

04-25-2018

BRIAN CAPUTO, Plaintiff, v. GONZALES, et al., Defendants.

Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF NOS. 43, 44, & 81)

Brian Caputo ("Plaintiff") is a prisoner¹ proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 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.

1 Plaintiff was detained at Kern County Jail at the time of the incidents alleged in the complaint. He is now incarcerated at FCI Marianna. --------

On March 22, 2018, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and recommendations, recommending that all claims and defendants be dismissed, except for Plaintiff's claims for violation of his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights against defendant Black and Doe Defendant(s), for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment against defendant Gonzalez, and for excessive force in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment against defendant Gonzalez. (ECF No. 81, p. 9).

The parties were provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations. The deadline to file objections has passed, and no objections have been filed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, 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 proper analysis.

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on March 22, 2018, are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. All claims and defendants are dismissed, except for Plaintiff's claims for violation of his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights against defendant Black and Doe Defendant(s), for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment against defendant Gonzalez, and for excessive force in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment against defendant Gonzalez; and

3. This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 25 , 2018

/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE