Micah Tafari Keyes-Anderson v. A. Chapa, et al.

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

Micah Tafari Keyes-Anderson v. A. Chapa, et al.

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICAH TAFARI KEYES-ANDERSON, Case No.: 1:25-cv-00077-SKO 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING 13 v. CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

14 A. CHAPA, et al., (Docs. 12, 14)

15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff seeks to hold defendants liable for violations of his civil rights. Following 18 screening, and Plaintiff’s election to proceed on the claims found cognizable by the Court, the 19 assigned magistrate judge recommended this action proceed only on Plaintiff’s Eighth 20 Amendment excessive force claims against Defendants Chapa, Luna, Salazar, Aguilar, Gamboa- 21 Campos, Bravo-Rodriguez, Valero, and Cruz; the remaining claims and defendants to be 22 dismissed. (Doc. 14.) The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and 23 notified him that any objections were due within 14 days. (Id. at 2.) The Court advised him that 24 the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of certain rights 25 on appeal.” (Id. at 3, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler,

772 F.3d 834, 838-39

(9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff 26 did not file objections, and the time to do so has passed. 27 According to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations 1 | are supported by the record and proper analysis. 2 Thus, the Court ORDERS: 3 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued November 26, 2025 (Doc. 14) are 4 ADOPTED in full. 5 2. This action PROCEEDS only on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force 6 claims against Eighth Amendment excessive force claims against Defendants Chapa, 7 Luna, Salazar, Aguilar, Gamboa-Campos, Bravo-Rodriguez, Valero, and Cruz. 8 3. Any remaining claims in Plaintiff's complaint are DISMISSED. 9 4. Defendants D. Diaz and J. Escutia are DISMISSED from the action. 10 5. The Clerk of Court is directed to update the docket and terminate D. Diaz and J. 11 Escutia as defendants. 12 B IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 Dated: _ December 26, 2025 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown