Opinion
No. 1:20-cv-00133-DAD-JLT (PC)
07-21-2020
KAREEM J. HOWELL, Plaintiff, v. SILVA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS
(Doc. No. 13)
Plaintiff Kareem J. Howell is a state prisoner proceeding 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 May 19, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff's complaint and found that plaintiff had stated cognizable claims against defendant Silva for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and for deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment, but that he had failed to state any other cognizable claims against defendant Silva or any other named defendants. (Doc. No. 10.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint or notify the court of his willingness to proceed only on the claims found to be cognizable in the screening order within twenty-one (21) days after service of the screening order. (Id. at 6-7.) On June 2, 2020, plaintiff notified the court that he was willing to proceed only on the claims identified by the magistrate judge in the screening order as cognizable. (Doc. No. 11.)
Consequently, on June 4, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that this action proceed on plaintiff's claims brought against defendant Silva for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and for deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Doc. No. 13.) The magistrate judge also recommended that all other claims brought and defendants named by plaintiff in his complaint be dismissed. (Id. at 1-2.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) 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 proper analysis.
Accordingly,
1. The findings and recommendations issued on June 4, 2020 (Doc. No. 13) are adopted in full;IT IS SO ORDERED.
2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff's claims against defendant Silva for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and for deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment;
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.
Dated: July 21 , 2020
/s/_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE