(PC) Poindexter v. Lynch

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MAURICE POINDEXTER, 12 Plaintiff, No. 2:21-cv-0760 TLN AC P 13 v. 14 LYNCH, et al., ORDER 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Maurice Poindexter (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this 18 civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On June 16, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which were 21 served on all parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one (21) days. (ECF No. 54.) This deadline has 23 passed, and no objections have been filed. 24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 27 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court[.]”). 28 Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 1 the record and by the proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations, (ECF No. 54), are ADOPTED in full; 4 2. Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgement, (ECF No. 48), is GRANTED in part 5 and DENIED in part, as follows: 6 a. GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants 7 Moreno, Navarro, and Elizarraras; 8 b. DENIED as to Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claims against 9 Defendants Moreno and Nguyen; and 10 c. DENIED as to Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim against 11 Nguyen. 12 d. The case proceeds on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force and failure to 13 protect claims against defendants Assaad, Elizarraras, Moreno, Navarro, and 14 Nguyen. 15 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings. 16 Date: August 27, 2025 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28