Opinion
1:20-cv-00640-DAD-JLT
07-11-2021
CORNELL DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. A. AGUNDEZ, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(DOC. NO. 18)
Plaintiff Cornell Davis is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On February 26, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued a screening order, finding that plaintiff could proceed only on his claims against defendants Agundez and Urrutia for their alleged use of excessive force and against defendant Dominguez for alleged retaliation and that all other claims were not cognizable. (Doc. No. 16). The magistrate judge directed plaintiff to either file a first amended complaint in an attempt to curie the deficiencies identified with respect to the other claims asserted in his complaint or to notify the court of his desire to proceed only on the claims found to be cognizable by the screening order. (Id. at 8.) On March 26, 2021, plaintiff filed a notice that he did not intend to file an amended complaint, which the magistrate judge construed as a notice that he wished to proceed only the claims found cognizable in the screening order. (Doc. No. 18 at 1).
Thus, on May 20, 2021, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that this action be allowed to proceed against defendants Agundez and Urrutia for their alleged use of excessive force and against defendant Dominguez for alleged retaliation and recommending that all other claims and defendant Chavez be dismissed. (Doc. No. 18 at 8.) The findings and recommendations served on plaintiff contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within twenty-one (21) days. (Id.) On June 14, 2021, plaintiff filed a notice that he “[accepted the recommendations, ” which the court construes as a statement of plaintiff s lack of objection. (Doc. No. 19.)
The document was erroneously docketed as objections.
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 file, including plaintiffs statement of no objection, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.
Accordingly, 1. The findings and recommendations issued on May 20, 2021 (Doc. No. 18) are adopted in full;
2. This action shall proceed only against defendants Agundez and Urrutia for their alleged use of excessive force and against defendant Dominguez for alleged retaliation;
3. Defendant Chavez is dismissed from this action;
4. All other claims are dismissed from this action; and
5. This case is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.