Opinion
No. 1:18-cv-00290-DAD-SAB (PC)
06-21-2018
MARCOS CASEY GUILLEN III, Plaintiff, v. T. FRANCISCO, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING DEFENDANT GARZA
(Doc. No. 12)
Plaintiff Marcos Casey Guillen III is appearing pro se in this civil rights action 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.
On March 6, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff's complaint and found that plaintiff stated a cognizable claim against defendant officer T. Francisco for violation of plaintiff's rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, but did not state a cognizable claim against defendant Warden Garza. (Doc. No. 8.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint to attempt to cure the deficiency or file a notice of his intent to proceed only on his claim against defendant Francisco. (Id. at 7.) On March 14, 2018, plaintiff filed a notice that he wished to proceed only on his claim brought against defendant Francisco. (Doc. No. 11.) /////
On March 15, 2018, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that this action proceed against defendant Francisco only for violation of the First Amendment, and that defendant Garza be dismissed from the action. (Doc. No. 12.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen days. (Id. at 2-3.) No objections were filed and the time for doing so has expired.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the 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 by proper analysis.
Accordingly:
1. The findings and recommendations issued March 15, 2018 (Doc. No. 12) are adopted in full;IT IS SO ORDERED.
2. Defendant Garza is dismissed from this action; and
3. The matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
Dated: June 21 , 2018
/s/_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE