From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. Davis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 5, 2017
No. 1:16-cv-00148-DAD-MJS (E.D. Cal. May. 5, 2017)

Opinion

No. 1:16-cv-00148-DAD-MJS

05-05-2017

GEORGE JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. R. DAVIS, et al., Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DIRECTING SERVICE

(Doc. No. 19)

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed 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 December 12, 2016, the assigned magistrate judge issued an order directing plaintiff to either file a third amended complaint or notify the court of his willingness to proceed only on the claims found to be cognizable in the court's screen order. (Doc. No. 17.) Plaintiff indicated his willingness to proceed only on the claims found cognizable by the magistrate judge in the December 29, 2016 screening order. (Doc. No. 18.) On January 19, 2017, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that service be initiated on defendant P. Johnson on the claim found by the court to be cognizable and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed from this action with prejudice. (Doc. No. 19.) Plaintiff filed no objections to those findings and recommendations and the time in which to do so has passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the undersigned has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the undersigned concludes the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

For the reasons set forth above:

1. Plaintiff shall proceed on his Eighth Amendment claim against defendant Johnson;

2. All other claims asserted in plaintiff's second amended complaint and all other named defendants are dismissed;

3. Service shall be initiated on defendant P. Johnson;

4. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff one (1) USM-285 forms, one (1) summons, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a copy of the second amended complaint filed August 15, 2016;

5. Within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete and return to the court the notice of submission of documents along with the following documents:

a. Completed summons,

b. One completed USM-285 form for each defendant listed above,

c. Two (2) copies of the endorsed complaint filed August 15, 2016; and

6. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the court will direct the United States Marshal to serve the above-named defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 without payment of costs. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 5 , 2017

/s/_________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Jackson v. Davis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 5, 2017
No. 1:16-cv-00148-DAD-MJS (E.D. Cal. May. 5, 2017)
Case details for

Jackson v. Davis

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. R. DAVIS, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: May 5, 2017

Citations

No. 1:16-cv-00148-DAD-MJS (E.D. Cal. May. 5, 2017)