(PC) Tucker v. Lopez

Opinion

JORDAN TUCKER, Case No.: 1:22-cv-01458 JLT SKO (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND v. RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANT G. LOPEZ, et al., PFEIFFER

Defendants. (Doc. 12)

Jordan Tucker seeks to hold Correctional Officer Lopez and Warden Pfeiffer liable for civil rights violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1.) The magistrate judge screened the allegations of the complaint pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), and found Plaintiff stated cognizable claims against Lopez for sexual assault in violation of the Eighth Amendment and unreasonable search in violation of the Fourth Amendment. However, the magistrate judge also found Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim against Warden Pfeiffer. (Doc. 9.) In response to the Screening Order, Plaintiff filed notice that he did not wish to file an amended complaint, and was willing to proceed only on the claims found cognizable. (Doc. 10.) On July 31, 2023, the magistrate judge recommended Christian Pfeiffer be dismissed from this action, and that the action proceed on the identified claims against Lopez. (Doc. 12.) The magistrate judge also recommended the remaining claims be dismissed. (Id. at 2.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on Plaintiff on the same date, and contained a notice that any objections were due within 14 days of the date of service. Ud.) Plaintiff was also advised that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of rights on appeal.” (d., citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (th Cir. 1991).) No objections have been filed, and the time to do so has expired. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS: 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on July 31, 2023 (Doc. 12) are ADOPTED in full. 2. Defendant Pfeiffer is DISMISSED from this action. 3. This action PROCEEDS only on the Eighth Amendment sexual assault and Fourth Amendment unreasonable search claims against Defendant Lopez. 4. All other claims in Plaintiff's complaint are DISMISSED. 5. The matter is referred to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. Dated: _ August 21, 2023 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE