Dominque Zafir Casey v. SGT. Brown, et al.

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

Dominque Zafir Casey v. SGT. Brown, et al.

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DOMINQUE ZAFIR CASEY, No. 1:23-cv-01068 JLT SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING 13 v. DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 14 SGT. BROWN, et al., (Docs. 34, 37) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant 18 to

42 U.S.C. § 1983

. The matter was referred to a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28

19 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On August 28, 2025, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 21 that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment be granted. (Doc. 37.) The magistrate judge 22 reasoned that Defendants presented sufficient evidence to meet their burden of showing that there 23 is no genuine issue of material fact because Plaintiff’s excessive force claims are barred by his 24 guilty plea in criminal court under Heck v. Humphrey,

512 U.S. 477

(1994). (Id. at 8.) The Court 25 served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified him that any objections were 26 due within 14 days. (Doc. 37 at 14.) The Court advised him that the “failure to file objections 27 within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id., citing Wilkerson v. 28 1 Wheeler,

772 F.3d 834, 838-39

(9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file objections, and the time to 2 | has passed. 3 According to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. 4 | Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations 5 || are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 6 1. The findings and recommendations issued on August 28, 2025, (Doc. 37), are 7 ADOPTED IN FULL. 8 2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, (Doc. 34), is GRANTED. 9 3. Judgment is entered in Defendants’ favor, and that the Clerk of Court is directed to 10 close this case. 11 b IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 | Dated: _September 22, 2025 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown