(PC)Roberson v. CDCR ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MORRIS ROBERSON, ) Case No.: 1:22-cv-0833 JLT SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND ) RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 13 v. ) CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS ) 14 CDCR, et al., ) (Doc. 11) ) 15 Defendants. ) ) 16 ) 17 Previously, the assigned magistrate judge found Plaintiff stated cognizable claims for excessive 18 force claim against Chavez, Salazer, Kyt, Lirio and Furlong, and failure to intervene claim against 19 defendants Valero, Rodriguez, Charles, Furlong, Acebedo, Lirio, Hunter, Loza and Gonzalez. (Doc. 8.) 20 However, Plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to support his other claims. On September 12, 2022, 21 Plaintiff filed a notice of his willingness to proceed only upon the claims found cognizable and 22 “dismiss all other claims.” (Doc. 9.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the action proceed 23 only on Plaintiff’s cognizable claims, and all other claims and defendants be dismissed. (Doc. 11.) 24 The court granted Plaintiff was 14 days to file any objections to the Findings and 25 Recommendations. (Doc. 11 at 2.) In addition, Plaintiff was informed “failure to file objections within 26 the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. (Id., citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 27 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991).) To date, 28 Plaintiff has not filed objections and the deadline to do so has passed. 1 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this Court conducted a de novo 2 || review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court finds the Findings and 3 || Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on September 13, 2022 (Doc. 11), are 5 ADOPTED in full. 6 2. This action SHALL proceed only on Plaintiff's excessive force claim against Chavez, 7 Salazer, Kyt, Lirio and Furlong, and failure to intervene claim against defendants 8 Valero, Rodriguez, Charles, Furlong, Acebedo, Lirio, Hunter, Loza and Gonzalez. 9 3. All other claims and defendants are DISMISSED from the action. 10 4. The matter is referred to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. 11 12 IS SO ORDERED. 13 || Dated: _ October 7, 2022 Charis [Tourn 14 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28