Bird v. Zuniga et al

Filing 34

ORDER DENYING 24 Motion for Clarification, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 9/2/16. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11
12
13
14

CASE NO. 1:15-cv-00910--MJS (PC)

MICHAEL BIRD,
Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
CLARIFICATION

v.
A. ZUNIGA, et al.,

(ECF No. 24)

Defendants.

15
16
17
18

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

19

rights action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds against

20

Defendant Musleh on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim.

21

On May 4, 2016, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found

22

that it stated a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Musleh but no

23

other claims. (ECF No. 9.) Plaintiff’s seeks clarification of the Court’s screening order,

24

specifically, an explanation as to why “the chain of causation was broken” with regard to

25

two dismissed defendants, and “what would of kept the chain intact.”

26

The Court cannot provide Plaintiff legal advice or direction in crafting a cognizable

27

claim. The Court has, through its screening order, provided Plaintiff with the legal

28

standard applicable to his claims and the reasons those claims, as pled, were not

1
2

cognizable. The Court is unable to provide further clarification on this issue.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for clarification is HEREBY DENIED.

3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 2, 2016

/s/

6

Michael J. Seng

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
2