(PC) Lupercio v. People of the State of CA ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RAMON NAVARRO LUPERCIO, No. 1:21-cv-01257-NONE-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING 14 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF DISMISSAL OF ACTION, WITH CALIFORNIA, et al., PREJUDICE, FOR THE FAILURE TO STATE 15 A COGNIZABLE CLAIM AND AS Defendants. FRIVOLOUS 16 (Doc. No. 19) 17 18 Plaintiff Ramon Navarro Lupercio is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 19 pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 On September 23, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge screened the first amended 21 complaint and issued findings and recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed, 22 with prejudice, for failure to state a cognizable claim and as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 23 § 1915(e). (Doc. No. 19.) Those findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and 24 contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen days after service. 25 (Id. at 5.) The deadline for plaintiff to file objections has now expired. 26 Although plaintiff did not file objections, he filed what appear to be a motion to dismiss 27 his prior conviction, (Doc. No. 20), and a motion for a jury trial, (Doc. No. 21). Both motions 28 include attachments and exhibits not incorporated by reference. Nevertheless, after a review of 1 | the filings, the court finds that the motions do not provide any basis for rejecting the magistrate 2 | judge’s finding that plaintiffs claims are barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), as 3 || against persons or entities involved in his criminal conviction. 4 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 5 || de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including plaintiffs 6 | motions, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 7 | proper analysis. 8 Accordingly, 9 1. The findings and recommendations issued on September 23, 2021, (Doc. No. 19), are 10 adopted in full; 11 2. This action is dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a cognizable claim and as 12 frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e); and 13 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case for the purpose 14 of closing the case, terminate all pending motions, and close this case. 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. ~ ‘ae 17 Dated: _ November 1, 2021 Sea 1" S98 ig UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28