Opinion
1:19-cv-00225-AWI-GSA-PC
03-09-2021
EUGENE RAYFORD, Plaintiff, v. SHERMAN, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDINGS IN FULL
(ECF No. 26.) ORDER FOR THIS CASE TO PROCEED WITH PLAINTIFF'S EIGHTH AMENDMENT CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANTS SHERMAN AND MILAM, AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS BASED ON PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM
Eugene Rayford ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action 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 January 28, 2021, the court entered findings and recommendations, recommending that this action proceed only against defendants Sherman and Milam for adverse conditions of confinement under the Eighth Amendment, and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff's failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 26.) On February 16, 2021, Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 27.)
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Plaintiff's objections, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.
III. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:
1. Plaintiff now proceeds in this case with his cognizable claims against defendant Stu Sherman and Richard Milam for adverse conditions of confinement in violation of the Eighth Amendment;IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 9, 2021
2. All other claims and defendants are dismissed from this case based on Plaintiff's failure to state a claim;
3. Plaintiff's claims concerning the prison appeals process, state law claims, and claims for declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and attorney's fees are dismissed based on Plaintiff's failure to state a claim;
4. Defendants T. Cisneros (Chief Deputy Warden), Tommy Wan (Associate Warden), M. Hacker (Associate Warden), Captain B. Chapman, Captain A. Williams, Lieutenant Donald Stohl, Lieutenant C. Livingston, Sergeant J. Brainard, Sergeant D. Crane, Sergeant Todd Ibbs, Sergeant B. Castelle, Correctional Officer (C/O) B. Winters, C/O P. Lara, C/O K. Rening, C/O J. Espino, C/O J. Cortez, C/O S. Magnia, C/O S. Jimenez, C/O T. Price, C/O Mrs. Velesquez, C/O Mrs. Ayon, C/O Marales, C/O Cruz, M. Voong (Chief, Office of Appeals), M. Hodges (Appeals Examiner), and John Doe (Director of Corrections, CDCR) are dismissed from this case based on Plaintiff's failure to state any claims against them; and
5. This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings, including initiation of service of process.
/s/_________
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE