(PC) Shannon v. Inniss-Burton

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL TYRONE SHANNON, No. 2:20-cv-02192-WBS-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 CHERYL INNISS-BURTON, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 19 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 29, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 21 were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 25 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis.1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 26 1 The findings and recommendations, in recounting defendant’s arguments, note 27 defendant’s contention that plaintiff cannot pursue relief from defendant in her individual capacity as a matter of law, without directly addressing this contention. (See Docket No. 61 at 2; 28 50-1 at 11 (citing Miranda B. v. Kitzhaber, 328 F.3d 1181, 1187-88 (9th Cir. 2003).) Because 1 | ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 61) are adopted in full. 3 2. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 50) is granted. 4 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 5 | Dated: August 30, 2024 / ZL . 6 at en Vin (i 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 12/shan2192.801.msj 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 *6 the court agrees with the magistrate judge’s recommendations that the court dismiss the ADA 27 | claim based on lack of evidence of intentional discrimination, it need not address defendant’s argument regarding plaintiffs ability to bring an ADA claim against defendant in her individual 28 | capacity.