Opinion
Case No.: 1:10-cv-01790-AWI-BAM (PC)
10-29-2014
LEONARDO JOSEPH RANGEL, Plaintiff, v. D. LATRAILLE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(ECF Nos. 56, 87)
Plaintiff Leonardo Joseph Rangel ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff's first amended complaint, filed on January 9, 2012, against Defendants LaTraille and Taberfor excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment, retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and assault and battery under state law.
Defendants were erroneously sued as "D. Latraille" and "J. Tabor" in the first amended complaint.
On August 20, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that Defendants' motion for summary judgment, filed on June 7, 2013, be granted in part and denied in part as follows: (1) Defendants' motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's claim of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and on Plaintiff's claim of assault and battery in violation of state law be denied; (2) Defendants' motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's claim of retaliation in violation of the First Amendment be granted; and (3) Defendants' motion for qualified immunity on Plaintiff's claim of excessive force be denied. The Findings and Recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within thirty (30) days after service. (ECF No. 111.) On September 22, 2014, the Court granted Defendants' request for an extension of time to file objections to the findings and recommendations. Defendants' objections were due on or before October 10, 2014. No objections have been filed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on August 20, 2014, are adopted in full;
2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment, filed on June 7, 2013, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:
a. Defendants' motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's claim of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and on Plaintiff's claim of assault and battery in violation of state law is DENIED;IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 29, 2014
b. Defendants' motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's claim of retaliation in violation of the First Amendment is GRANTED;
c. Defendants' motion for qualified immunity on Plaintiff's claim of excessive force is DENIED;
3. This matter shall be set for jury trial on Plaintiff's claims of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and assault and battery under state law against Defendants LaTraille and Taber; and
4. This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings consistent with this order.
/s/_________
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE