Opinion
No. 2:09-cv-3012 JAM KJN P
04-10-2013
JOHN EDWARD MITCHELL, Plaintiff, v. J. HAVILAND, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On February 5, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed February 5, 2013, are adopted in full;
2. Defendant Easterling's motion to dismiss (dkt. no. 54) is granted, and plaintiff's excessive force claim is dismissed without prejudice;
3. The motion to dismiss (dkt. no. 54) filed by defendants Bickham, Cappel, Singh, and Haviland is granted, and plaintiff's retaliation claims are dismissed with prejudice;
4. Defendant McGuire's motion to dismiss plaintiff's retaliation claims is denied; and
5. Within fourteen days from service of this order, defendant Rosario is directed to file an answer to plaintiff's excessive force claims, and defendants Rosario, Garcia, and McGuire are directed to file an answer to plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claims.
John A. Mendez
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE