Opinion
2:22-cv-02313-DAD-CKD (PC)
08-09-2023
MICHAEL ERNEST MITCHUM, JR., Plaintiff, v. KORY HONEA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS
(DOC. NO. 11)
Plaintiff Michael Ernest Mitchum, Jr. is a county jail inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action. 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 March 6, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff's complaint filed in this action and found that plaintiff had stated potentially cognizable claim “under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) against defendant Butte County based upon plaintiff's allegations that he suffered injuries as a result of a lack of handrails near toilets and showers,” but that plaintiff had failed to state any other cognizable claims against defendant Butte County and failed to state any claims against the other defendants. (Doc. No. 7 at 2.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file a first amended complaint or notify the court of his willingness to proceed only on the claim found to be cognizable in the screening order within twenty-one (21) days after service of the screening order. (Id. at 7.) On March 21, 2023, plaintiff notified the court that he was willing to proceed only on the claim identified by the magistrate judge in the screening order as cognizable. (Doc. No. 10.)
Consequently, on March 28, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that this action proceed only on plaintiff's ADA claim against defendant Butte County based on his “allegations that he suffered injuries as a result of a lack of handrails near toilets and showers.” (Doc. No. 11 at 2.) The magistrate judge further recommended that all other claims and defendants be dismissed. (Id.) The pending 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. at 1-2.) To date, 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 March 28, 2023 (Doc. No. 11) are adopted in full;
2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff's ADA claim against defendant Butte County based on allegations that plaintiff suffered injuries as a result of a lack of handrails near toilets and showers;
3. All other claims brought by plaintiff in this action and all other defendants named in plaintiff's complaint are dismissed;
4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to update the docket to reflect the termination of all defendants except defendant Butte County; and
5. This action is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings consistent with this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.