Opinion
No. 1:19-cv-00462-DAD-EPG
10-21-2019
DEVONTE B HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. K KYLE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(Doc. No. 17)
Plaintiff Devonte B Harris is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 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 May 28, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff's complaint and found that plaintiff had stated cognizable claims against defendants Kyle, Grossman, Thompson, Depovic, Moreno, Overly, Wright, Gamez, and Castillo for deliberate indifference to a serious risk of harm in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against defendants Kyle, Moreno, Wright, Overly, Gamez, and Castillo for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment. (Doc. No. 10.) The magistrate judge also found that the complaint failed to state any other cognizable claim against any other defendant. (Id. at 15.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint, stand on his original complaint, or notify the court of his willingness to proceed only on the claims found to be cognizable in the screening order within thirty days after service of the screening order. (Id. at 15-16.) On June 19, 2019, plaintiff notified the court of his willingness to proceed only on the cognizable claims identified by the magistrate judge in the screening order. (Doc. No. 14.)
Consequently, on July 11, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that this action proceed on plaintiff's claim for deliberate indifference to serious risk of harm in violation of the Eighth Amendment against defendants Kyle, Grossman, Thompson, Depovic, Moreno, Overly, Wright, Gamez, and Castillo; and for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment against defendants Kyle, Moreno, Wright, Overly, Gamez, and Castillo. (Doc. No. 17.) The magistrate judge recommended that all other claims and defendants be dismissed. (Id. at 2.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen days after service. (Id.) No objections have been filed and the time in which to do so has now passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly,
1. The findings and recommendations issued on July 11, 2019 (Doc. No. 17) are adopted in full;///// ///// ///// /////
2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff's claim for deliberate indifference to serious risk of harm in violation of the Eighth Amendment against defendants Kyle, Grossman, Thompson, Depovic, Moreno, Overly, Wright, Gamez, and Castillo; and for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment against defendants Kyle, Moreno, Wright, Overly, Gamez, and Castillo;
3. All other claims and defendants are dismissed; and
4. This action is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order.IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 21 , 2019
/s/_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE