Opinion
1:22-cv-0709 JLT CDB (PC)
12-02-2023
SEQUOYAH DESERTHAWK KIDWELL, Plaintiff, v. JASON COLLINS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS (Doc. 28)
Sequoyah Deserthawk Kidwell, also known as Jason Scott Harper, seeks to hold the defendants liable for civil rights violations 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.
The magistrate judge screened Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), and found Plaintiff stated a cognizable claim for retaliation under the First Amendment against Defendant Aguna, in his individual capacity. However, the magistrate judge found Plaintiff failed to allege cognizable claims against the other defendants. Therefore, the Court granted Plaintiff the option of filing an amended complaint or proceeding on the claim found cognizable. (See generally Doc. 26.) Plaintiff informed the Court he was willing to proceed only on his First Amendment Claim against Aguna. (Doc. 27.)
The magistrate judge then issued Findings and Recommendations, recommending this action proceed only on Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant Aguna, in his individual capacity, and that the remaining claims and defendants to be dismissed. (Doc. 28.) The magistrate judge advised Plaintiff the “[f]ailure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of his rights on appeal.” (Id. at 3, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Plaintiff did not file objections and the deadline to do expired.
According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court performed a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS:
1. The Findings and Recommendations issued November 14, 2023 (Doc. 28) are ADOPTED in full.
2. This action PROCEEDS only on Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant Aguna, in his individual capacity.
3. The remaining claims in Plaintiff's first amended complaint are DISMISSED.
4. The following Defendants are DISMISSED from this action, and the Clerk of Court is directed to update the docket to reflect their dismissal:
a. Jason Collins
b. Donna Williams
c. Jose Cisneros Vasquez
d. Kathleen Allison
e. Mark Alford
f. Stu Sherman
g. Angel Armenta
h. Ricky Dela Cruz
i. C. Torres
j. Raul Morales
k. Lorenzo Macias
l. Gabino Mercado
m. Cecilia Sanchez
n. Maria Quinnonez
o. Jaime Escobedo
p. Jonathan Esparza
q. Connie Gipson
r. “Office of Appeals” and
s. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
5. The Clerk of Court is directed to correct the docket regarding the remaining Defendant's surname, as reflected in Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, from “Henry Aguwa” to Henry Aguna.
6. This matter is referred to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.