(PC) Brenner v. Shirley

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ZACHARY WILL BRENNER, Case No.: 1:24-cv-000545-KES-SKO 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS 13 v. CERTAIN CLAIMS HEATHER SHIRLEY, et al., Doc. 12 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff Zachary Will Brenner is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20 Plaintiff initiated this action on May 8, 2024. Doc. 1. After the assigned magistrate judge screened the complaint, and prior to the magistrate judge’s issuance of the findings and recommendations, plaintiff filed a response to the screening order indicating that he did not wish to file an amended complaint and wanted to proceed on only his Eighth Amendment claims.

24 Doc. 10. The magistrate judge then issued findings and recommendations recommending the action proceed only on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claims against defendants Shirley, Cronjager, and DeGough, and that any remaining claims be dismissed. Docs.

27 9, 12. The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and provided that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days of service. Doc. 12 at 2. The | magistrate judge advised plaintiff that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may | result in waiver of his rights on appeal.” Jd. at 2, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 | (9th Cir. 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). To date, no objections | have been filed.

5 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court conducted a de novo review of this case.

6 | Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the findings and recommendations to | be supported by the record and proper analysis.

8 Accordingly, 9 1. The findings and recommendations issued August 15, 2024 (Doc. 12) are ADOPTED 10 in full; 11 2. This action PROCEEDS only on plaintiff's Eighth Amendment conditions of 12 confinement claims against Defendants Shirley, Cronjager, and DeGough; 13 3. The remaining claims in plaintiff's complaint are DISMISSED; and 14 4. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings.

17 | TIS SO ORDERED. _ 18 Dated: _ March 28, 2025 4A .

19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE