Garraway v. Ciufo

Full title: MITCHELL GARRAWAY, Plaintiff, v. JACQUILINE CIUFO, et al., Defendants

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 17, 2018

No. 1:17-cv-00533-DAD-GSA (E.D. Cal. Jul. 17, 2018)

Opinion

No. 1:17-cv-00533-DAD-GSA

07-17-2018

MITCHELL GARRAWAY, Plaintiff, v. JACQUILINE CIUFO, et al., Defendants

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, FINDING CERTAIN CLAIMS COGNIZABLE, DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS, AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE

(Doc. No. 11)

Plaintiff is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action brought pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302.

On April 17, 2017, plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action. (Doc. No. 1.) On April 9, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff's complaint and issued findings and recommendations, recommending that this action be permitted to proceed on plaintiff's claim against defendants Ciufo, Miller, and Zaragoza for failure to protect plaintiff in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and that all remaining claims be dismissed from this action for failure to state a claim, without leave to amend. (Doc. No. 11.) Plaintiff was provided fourteen days in which to file objections to the findings and recommendations. (Id.) The fourteen-day deadline has expired, and plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, the undersigned has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the undersigned concludes the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly:

1. The findings and recommendations issued on April 9, 2018 (Doc. No. 11) are adopted in full;

2. This action now proceeds on plaintiff's claim against defendants Ciufo, Miller, and Zaragoza for failure to protect plaintiff under the Eighth Amendment as alleged in his original complaint filed April 17, 2017;

3. Plaintiff's claim brought under 18 U.S.C. § 4042 is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted without leave to amend; and

4. This case is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings, including initiation of service.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 17 , 2018

/s/_________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE