The opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 EUGENE CARLTON BROWN, Case No. 1:19-cv-00240-LJO-BAM (PC)
12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING
13 v. DISMISSAL OF ACTION FOR FAILURE TO
STATE A CLAIM
14 WINN-REED, et al.,
(ECF No. 11)
15 Defendants.
16
17 Plaintiff Eugene Carlton Brown (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in
18 forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred
19 to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
20 On July 17, 2019, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations
21 recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to state a cognizable section 1983 claim.
22 (ECF No. 11.) Those findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained
23 notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at
24 7.) Plaintiff filed objections on August 9, 2019. (ECF No. 12.)
25 The Court finds that Plaintiff’s objections are unpersuasive. As discussed in the
26 Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations, despite Plaintiff’s allegations that his
27 magazine subscriptions have been wrongfully confiscated, Plaintiff then alleges that the
28 publications were ultimately placed on the Centralized List of Disapproved Publications in
1 compliance with CDCR regulations. To the extent Plaintiff is challenging the placement of the
2 publications on the Centralized List, Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the regulation is not
3 reasonably related to legitimate penological interests. See Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 89–90
4 (1987).
5 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a
6 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Plaintiff’s
7 objections, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations are
8 supported by the record and by proper analysis.
9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
10 1. The findings and recommendations issued on July 17, 2019, (ECF No. 11), are
11 adopted in full;
12 2. This action is dismissed, with prejudice, due to Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim;
13 and
14 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
15
IT IS SO ORDERED.
16
17 Dated: January 23, 2020 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28