Opinion
No. 1:18-cv-01364-DAD-GSA (PC)
04-14-2020
WILLIAM J. GRADFORD, Plaintiff, v. GUILTRON, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS
(Doc. No. 22)
Plaintiff William J. Gradford is a state prisoner appearing pro se and in forma pauperis 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 12, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff's first amended complaint and issued findings and recommendations, finding that plaintiff had stated a cognizable claim against defendant Guiltron for retaliation in violation of plaintiff's First Amendment rights, but that he had failed to state any other cognizable claims. (Doc. No. 22.) In addition, the magistrate judge concluded that plaintiff had already been given an opportunity to amend his original complaint, with ample guidance from the court, and that the deficiencies in his first amended complaint are not capable of being cured by amendment. (Id. at 11.) Thus, the pending findings and recommendations recommend that this action proceed only on plaintiff's claim against defendant Guiltron for retaliation, and that plaintiff's other claims be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Id. at 11-12.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were due within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 12.)
On February 21, 2020, plaintiff notified the court that he has no objections to the pending findings and recommendations. (Doc. No. 23.)
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,
1. The findings and recommendations issued on February 12, 2020 (Doc. No. 22) are adopted in full;IT IS SO ORDERED.
2. This action now proceeds only on plaintiff's retaliation claim brought against defendant Guiltron;
3. All other claims are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief; and
4. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order.
Dated: April 14 , 2020
/s/_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE