Hazeltine v. Hicks et al

Filing 11

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Regarding Plaintiff's Notice of Willingness to Proceed on Cognizable Claims signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 03/03/2015. Referred to Judge O'Neill; Objections to F&R due by 3/20/2015. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11

RICK HAZELTINE,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
vs.
FRANCES HICKS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:14-cv-00056 LJO DLB PC
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF
WILLINGNESS TO PROCEED ON
COGNIZABLE CLAIMS
[ECF No. 10]

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Plaintiff Rick Hazeltine (“Plaintiff”) is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis in this civil rights action. Plaintiff filed this action on January 15, 2014.
On January 30, 2015, the Court screened Plaintiff’s Complaint and found that it stated the
following claim: Excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants
Young, Gamez, Casper, Oldan, Negrete, Avilia, Smith, and Ho. The Court ordered Plaintiff to
file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on this claim.

23

On February 20, 2015, Plaintiff notified the Court that he wanted to proceed only on the
24
25
26
27
28

cognizable claim identified above.
RECOMMENDATION
Accordingly, the Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS the following:
1. This action be ORDERED to proceed on the following claim: Excessive force in
1

1

violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Ian Young, Benjamin Gamez, Rashaun

2

Casper, Julius Oldan, Porfirio Sanchez Negrete, David Avilia, Rickey Smith, and Charles Ho;

3
4
5
6

and
2. The remaining claims, as well as Defendants Frances Hicks and Aldo Mendez, be
DISMISSED from this action.
These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

7

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen
8
9
10
11
12
13

(14) days after date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written
objections with the Court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate
Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections
within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v.
Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

14
15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

March 3, 2015

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2