From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gunn v. Olmstead

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 20, 2021
2:20-cv-2232 WBS AC P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2021)

Opinion

2:20-cv-2232 WBS AC P

12-20-2021

AUMINTRIUS DAMOUR GUNN, Plaintiff, v. R. OLMSTEAD, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

WILLIAM B.SHUBB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff, a former county prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 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 November 10, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No. 16. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations [as of December 13, 2021].

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed November 10, 2021, ECF No. 16, are adopted in full.

2. For the reason set forth in the August 9, 2021 Screening Order (ECF No. 13), plaintiffs state court tort claims and all claims against defendants Gardner, Olmstead, and Stanton Correctional Facility are dismissed without prejudice.

3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial proceedings.


Summaries of

Gunn v. Olmstead

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 20, 2021
2:20-cv-2232 WBS AC P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2021)
Case details for

Gunn v. Olmstead

Case Details

Full title:AUMINTRIUS DAMOUR GUNN, Plaintiff, v. R. OLMSTEAD, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Dec 20, 2021

Citations

2:20-cv-2232 WBS AC P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2021)