Opinion
2:22-cv-01275-DAD-CKD (PC)
09-24-2023
ADAM RANDOLPH POWELL, Plaintiff, v. E. ROSE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS
(DOC. NO. 11)
DALE A. DROZD UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Adam Randolph Powell is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 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 July 21, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff's first amended complaint and found that plaintiff had stated cognizable Eighth Amendment excessive use of force claims against defendants Rose, Rivera-Salazar, Lam, Palacios, Piceno, Hambright, Gonzalez, Suchoski, Dyer, and Plascencia, and a cognizable Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim against defendant Roblek, but that plaintiff failed to state any other cognizable claims against the remaining defendants. (Doc. No. 11.) Accordingly, on July 21, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that this action proceed only on the claims found to be cognizable in the screening order and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed from this action due to plaintiff's failure to state a cognizable claim against them. (Id. at 3, 4, 6.) The pending findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 7.) To date, no objections have been filed, and the time in which to do so has passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.
Accordingly, 1. The findings and recommendations issued on July 21, 2023 (Doc. No. 11) are adopted in full;
2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive use of force claims against defendants Rose, Rivera-Salazar, Lam, Palacios, Piceno, Hambright, Gonzalez, Suchoski, Dyer, and Plascencia, and plaintiff's Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim against defendant Roblek;
3. All other claims brought by plaintiff in this action are dismissed;
4. Defendants Macovichuk, Paoli, Navratil, and John Doe Nos. 1-5 are dismissed as defendants in this action;
5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to update the docket to reflect that defendants Macovichuk, Paoli, Navratil, and John Doe Nos. 1-5 have been terminated from this action; and
6. This action is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.