(PC) Gibson v. Castellanos et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
REGINALD GIBSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
CASTELLANOS, et al.,
Defendants.
No. 1:21-cv-00794-KES-FJS (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS TO GRANT
DEFENDANT CASTELLANOS’ MOTION
FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BASED ON PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE TO
EXHAUST ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
Doc. 74
Plaintiff Reginald Gibson is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is proceeding on the
claims in his second amended complaint against: (1) Defendant Castellanos for excessive force in
violation of the Eighth Amendment for incidents on December 1, 2019, and April 4, 2020, and
(2) Defendant Castellanos for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment for the April 4,
2020, incident.1 This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On September 8, 2026, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and
recommendations that Defendant Castellanos’s motion for partial summary judgment be granted.
Doc. 74. The findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that
1 Defendant Riley was dismissed from this case on January 3, 2024. Doc. 36.
Case 1:21-cv-00794-KES-FJS Document 75 Filed 10/13/26 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
any objections must be filed within fourteen days after service. Id. No objections were filed, and
the deadline to do so has expired.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court has conducted a de novo review of
this case and carefully reviewed the entire file. The Court finds that the findings and
recommendations with respect to plaintiff’s First Amendment claim against Defendant
Castellanos are supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. The findings and recommendations issued on September 8, 2026, Doc. 74, are adopted as
to the dismissal of plaintiff’s First Amendment claim against Defendant Castellanos;
2. Defendant Castellanos’s motion for partial summary judgment, Doc. 54, is granted;
3. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Castellanos for retaliation in violation of the First
Amendment for the incident on April 4, 2020, is dismissed, without prejudice, for failure
to exhaust administrative remedies;
4. This action proceeds only on the claims in Plaintiff’s second amended complaint against
Defendant Castellanos for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment for the
December 1, 2019, and April 4, 2020, incidents.
5. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 11, 2026
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:21-cv-00794-KES-FJS Document 75 Filed 10/13/26 Page 2 of 2