From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thompson v. Gomez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 2, 2018
Case No.: 1:18-cv-00125-LJO-SAB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2018)

Opinion

Case No.: 1:18-cv-00125-LJO-SAB (PC)

04-02-2018

MARK SHANE THOMPSON, Plaintiff, v. A. GOMEZ, et al., Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS, AND REFERRING THE MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR INITIATION OF SERVICE OF PROCESS [ECF Nos. 8, 9, 10]

Plaintiff Mark Shane Thompson is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On February 12, 2018, the Court screened Plaintiff's complaint and found that it stated a cognizable claim against Defendants A. Gomez, E. Weiss, Y. Sazo, C. Gray, J. Busby, Rodriguez, and J. Doe Nos 1 and 2 for excessive force only. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff was granted an opportunity to amend his complaint, or notify the Court that he is agreeable to proceeding only on the excessive force identified as cognizable. (Id.)

On March 5, 2018, Plaintiff notified the Court that he wished to proceed only on the excessive force and dismiss all other claims. (ECF No. 9.)

Therefore, on March 6, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that this action proceed on Plaintiff's excessive force claim against Defendants A. Gomez, E. Weiss, Y. Sazo, C. Gray, J. Busby, Rodriguez, and J. Doe Nos 1 and 2, and all other claims and Defendants be dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. (ECF No. 10.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that objections were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (Id.) No objections have been filed and the time period to do has expired.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the undersigned has conducted a de novo review of plaintiff's case. The undersigned concludes the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The March 6, 2018 Findings and Recommendations are adopted in full;

2. This action shall proceed against Defendants A. Gomez, E. Weiss, Y. Sazo, C. Gray, J. Busby, Rodriguez, and J. Doe Nos 1 and 2 for excessive force;

3. All other claims and Defendants are dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief; and

4. The matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for initiation of service of process. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 2 , 2018

/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Thompson v. Gomez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 2, 2018
Case No.: 1:18-cv-00125-LJO-SAB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2018)
Case details for

Thompson v. Gomez

Case Details

Full title:MARK SHANE THOMPSON, Plaintiff, v. A. GOMEZ, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Apr 2, 2018

Citations

Case No.: 1:18-cv-00125-LJO-SAB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2018)