Bonner v. Gipson et al
Filing
10
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that This Action Proceed on Plaintiff's Excessive Force Claims Against Defendants Sgt. Scaife and C.O. Holguin and That All Other Claims and Defendants be Dismissed re 1 Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 7/9/2014. Referred to Judge O'Neill. Objections to F&R due within thirty (30) days. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
WILLIAM ROY BONNER,
12
Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
GIPSON, et al.,
15
Defendants.
Case No. 1:14-cv-00610-LJO-JLT (PC)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
THAT ACTION PROCEED ON
PLAINTIFF'S EXCESSIVE FORCE
CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANTS SGT.
SCAIFE & C.O. HOLGUIN AND THAT ALL
OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS BE
DISMISSED
16
(Doc. 1, 8)
17
RESPONSE DUE WITHIN 30 DAYS
18
19
I. Background
Plaintiff, William Roy Bonner, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis
20
in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this action on
21
April 25, 2014. (Doc. 1.) On June 11, 2014, the Court screened the Complaint pursuant to 28
22
U.S.C. § 1915A and found that it stated cognizable claims against Defendants Sgt Scaife and
23
C.O. Holguin for using excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Doc. 8.)
24
However, the Court found that Plaintiff’s Complaint failed to state any cognizable claims. (Id.)
25
The Court ordered Plaintiff to either remedy the deficiencies in his non-cognizable claims
26
via an amended complaint or to notify the Court that Plaintiff wishes to proceed only on the
27
claim(s) found to be cognizable. (Id.) On June 25, 2014, Plaintiff informed the Court that he
28
wishes to proceed solely on the claim(s) found to be cognizable in the Court’s June 11, 2014
1
1
order. (Doc. 9.)
2
II.
3
Findings and Recommendation
Plaintiff=s Complaint states cognizable claims for relief against Defendants Sgt. Scaife and
4
C.O. Holguin for using excessive force in violation of the Eight Amendment. However, Plaintiff
5
does not state any other claims against Defendants Sgt. Scaife and/or C.O. Holguin upon which
6
relief may be granted, nor does it state any cognizable claims against any other Defendant named
7
in this action. Plaintiff was provided with the option of filing an amended complaint or
8
proceeding with the claims found to be cognizable by the Court. Plaintiff opted to proceed on his
9
cognizable claims under the Eighth Amendment for use of excessive force against Defendants
10
Sgt. Scaife and C.O. Holguin.
11
Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:
12
1.
This action proceed on Plaintiff=s Complaint, filed April 25, 2014, against
13
Defendants Sgt. Scaife and C/O Holguin on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment
14
excessive force claims;
2.
15
all other claims and Defendants should be dismissed for Plaintiff's failure to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted; and
16
3.
17
the action should be referred back to the Magistrate Judge for service and further
proceedings.
18
These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District
19
20
Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(l). Within 30
21
days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written
22
objections with the Court. The document should be captioned AObjections to Magistrate Judge=s
23
Findings and Recommendations.@
24
///
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
///
2
1
2
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).
3
4
5
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
July 9, 2014
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?