Maureece Simpkins v. Armando Delacruz, et al.

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MAUREECE SIMPKINS, Case No.: 1:25-cv-00249-JLT-SKO 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING 13 v. CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS ARMANDO DELACRUZ, et al., (Docs. 12 & 14) 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, seeks to hold defendants liable for violations of his civil rights. Following screening and plaintiff’s election to proceed on the claims found cognizable by the Court, the assigned United States Magistrate Judge recommended this action proceed only on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claims against defendants Delacruz and Escobedo, Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to serious medical needs claim against defendant Policarpio, and Eighth Amendment failure to protect claims against defendants Hightower and Moreno-Guillen; the remaining claims and defendants to be dismissed. (Doc. 14). The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on plaintiff and notified him that any objections were due within 14 days and advised that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of certain rights on appeal.” (Id. at 2- 3, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014)). More than 14 days have passed, and no objections have been filed.

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

2 | Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations || are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued December 17, 2025 (Doc. 14) are 5 ADOPTED in full.

6 2. This action PROCEEDS only on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force 7 claims against Defendants Delacruz and Escobedo, Eighth Amendment deliberate 8 indifference to serious medical needs claim against Defendant Policarpio, and 9 Eighth Amendment failure to protect claims against Defendants Hightower and 10 Moreno-Guillen.

11 3. Any remaining claims in Plaintiff's complaint are DISMISSED.

12 4. Defendants Robert Cesena, Alexis Russell, Sheila Avalos, Carlos Urrutia, Michael 13 Rients, Aaron Medina, and Hunberto Ochoa are DISMISSED from the action.

14 5. The Clerk of Court is directed to update the docket and terminate Cesena, Russell, 15 Avalos, Urrutia, Rients, Medina, and Ochoa as defendants.

7 IT IS SO ORDERED.

1g | Dated: _January 15, 2026 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE