Opinion
2:22-CV-1629-TLN-DMC
08-04-2023
JAVAUGHN ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. ALEXANDER ACUNA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Troy L. Nunley, United States District Judge
Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules.
On June 13, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within the time specified therein. No objections to the findings and recommendations were filed.
The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed June 13, 2023 (ECF No. 28) are ADOPTED IN FULL;
2. Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 25) is GRANTED as to all claims against Defendant Phelps;
3. Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 25) is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's claims related to the conditions of confinement;
4. Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 25) is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's claim that she was denied showers;
5. Defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 25) is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's claim of sexual exploitation;
6. Plaintiff may file a first amended complaint addressing the defects identified in the Magistrate Judge's June 13, 2023 findings and recommendations (ECF No. 28);
7. If no first amended complaint is filed within 30 days of the date of this order, the action shall proceed on Plaintiff's original complaint on her excessive force claims against Defendants Acuna and Jones only; and
8. The matter is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.