(PC) Brown v. Winn-Reed ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EUGENE CARLTON BROWN, Case No. 1:19-cv-00240-LJO-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING 13 v. DISMISSAL OF ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 14 WINN-REED, et al., (ECF No. 11) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Eugene Carlton Brown (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 18 forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred 19 to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 17, 2019, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations 21 recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to state a cognizable section 1983 claim. 22 (ECF No. 11.) Those findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained 23 notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 24 7.) Plaintiff filed objections on August 9, 2019. (ECF No. 12.) 25 The Court finds that Plaintiff’s objections are unpersuasive. As discussed in the 26 Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations, despite Plaintiff’s allegations that his 27 magazine subscriptions have been wrongfully confiscated, Plaintiff then alleges that the 28 publications were ultimately placed on the Centralized List of Disapproved Publications in 1 compliance with CDCR regulations. To the extent Plaintiff is challenging the placement of the 2 publications on the Centralized List, Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the regulation is not 3 reasonably related to legitimate penological interests. See Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 89–90 4 (1987). 5 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 6 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Plaintiff’s 7 objections, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations are 8 supported by the record and by proper analysis. 9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 10 1. The findings and recommendations issued on July 17, 2019, (ECF No. 11), are 11 adopted in full; 12 2. This action is dismissed, with prejudice, due to Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim; 13 and 14 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 17 Dated: January 23, 2020 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28