Dews v. Kern Radiology Medical Group, Inc. et al

Filing 21

ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's 20 Motion for Notification signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 12/18/2012. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

CLARENCE LEON DEWS,
Plaintiff,

10
11

CASE No. 1:12-cv-00242-AWI-MJS PC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR NOTIFICATION

v.
(ECF No. 20)

12
13
14

KERN RADIOLOGY MEDICAL GROUP,
INC., et al.,
Defendants.
/

15
16

Plaintiff Clarence Leon Dews is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

17

pauperis in this civil rights action filed on February 21, 2012 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

18

1983. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff has declined Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (Decline

19

Magistrate, ECF No. 9.)

20

Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on March 2, 2012 (First Am. Compl.,

21

ECF No. 4), without his original Complaint having been screened. The Court has not yet

22

screened the First Amended Complaint.

23
24

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for notification to proceed with
discovery and dispositive relief. (Mot. for Notification, ECF No. 20.)

25

This motion is premature and relief cannot be granted. The Court is required to

26

screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or

27

officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must

28

dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally
-1-

1

“frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or

2

that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C.

3

§ 1915A(b)(1),(2).
The Court is aware of Plaintiff’s action and his First Amended Compliant is in line

4
5

for screening. However, the Court has a large number of prisoner civil rights cases

6

pending before it and will screen Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint in due course.

7

Until such time as the Court has screened Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, no

8

further action is required of Plaintiff. The Court will not direct service of summons by the

9

United States Marshal absent a pleading containing cognizable claims for relief against

10

the named Defendants. Plaintiff will have an opportunity to raise discovery and

11

evidentiary matters, and seek dispositive relief at any appropriate time subsequent to

12

service.
Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for

13
14

notification to proceed with discovery and dispositive relief (Mot. for Notification, ECF

15

No. 20) is DENIED.

16
17
18
.

19
20
21
22
23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25

Dated:
12eob4

December 18, 2012

Michael J. Seng

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

26
27
28
-2-