(PC) Browning v. Fitzpatrick

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

(PC) Browning v. Fitzpatrick

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ELRADER BROWNING, III, No. 1:21-cv-01751 JLT GSA (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 v. (Doc. 12) 14 FITZPATRICK, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights 18 action seeking relief under

42 U.S.C. § 1983

. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 11, 2025, the magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations that this 21 action proceed on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claims against Defendants 22 Renteria, Arreola, and Haddad, and that all other claims against all other defendants be dismissed. 23 (Doc. 12.) The Court advised Plaintiff that the “failure to file objections within the specified time 24 may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id. at 9, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler,

772 F.3d 834

, 25 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file objections, and the time to do so has passed. 26 According to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(C), this Court performed a de novo review of this 27 case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and 28 Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 1 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued July 11, 2025 (Doc. 12) are 2 ADOPTED IN FULL. 3 2. This action shall PROCEED on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force 4 claims against Defendants Renteria, H. Arreola, and A. Haddad. 5 3. All other claims and all other Defendants identified in this matter are 6 DISMISSED. 7 g IT IS SO ORDERED. o | Dated: _ August 10, 2025 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown