Gonzalez v. Razo et al

Filing 37

SCREENING ORDER FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, Recommending That All Other Claims and Defendants Be Dismissed With Prejudice 1 , signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 1/24/17: 30-Day Objection Deadline. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6

MANUEL ANTONIO GONZALEZ,

7

Plaintiff,

8
9
10

v.
J. RAZO, et al.,
Defendants.

1:15-cv-01098-DAD-EPG (PC)
SCREENING ORDER
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,
RECOMMENDING THAT ALL OTHER
CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS BE
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE
(ECF NO. 1)

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Manuel Antonio Gonzalez (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which includes attendant state law claims. On July
16, 2015, Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action. (ECF No. 1).
The Court screened Plaintiff’s Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915A. (ECF No.
31). The Court found that it states cognizable claims for unconstitutional excessive force
against Defendants Correctional Officer Razo and Correctional Officer Johnson; failure to
protect against Defendant Correctional Officer Blankenship; deliberate indifference to serious
medical needs against Defendants R.N. Rice and Ybarra; retaliation in violation of the First
Amendment against Defendant Ybarra; assault and battery against Defendants Correctional
Officer Razo and Correctional Officer Johnson; negligence against Defendant Correctional
Officer Blankenship; and medical malpractice against Defendant R.N. Rice.

The Court

allowed Plaintiff the opportunity to amend his complaint or to stand on his complaint, subject
to the issuance of findings and recommendations consistent with the screening order. (Id.). On
January 23, 2017, Plaintiff notified the Court that he is willing to proceed only on the claims
found cognizable by the Court. (ECF No. 35).
Pursuant to an order that will be entered concurrently with these findings and
recommendations, the Court found that service of the complaint was appropriate, and

1

1

forwarded service documents to Plaintiff. As Plaintiff has failed to state any other claims, or

2

claims against any other defendants, and as Plaintiff has agreed to go forward only on the

3

claims found cognizable by the Court, the Court is now recommending that all other claims and

4

defendants be dismissed from this case.

5

The Court has found that the complaint states cognizable claims for unconstitutional

6

excessive force against Defendants Correctional Officer Razo and Correctional Officer

7

Johnson; failure to protect against Defendant Correctional Officer Blankenship; deliberate

8

indifference to serious medical needs against Defendants R.N. Rice and Ybarra; retaliation in

9

violation of the First Amendment against Defendant Ybarra; assault and battery against

10

Defendants Correctional Officer Razo and Correctional Officer Johnson; negligence against

11

Defendant Correctional Officer Blankenship; and medical malpractice against Defendant R.N.

12

Rice. The Court found that Plaintiff failed to state any other claims, or claims against any other

13

defendants. Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that all

14

other claims and defendants be dismissed from this action with prejudice.

15

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District

16

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within

17

thirty (30) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file

18

written objections with the Court.

19

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

20

objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v.

21

Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394

22

(9th Cir. 1991)).

The document should be captioned “Objections to

23
24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 24, 2017

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

26
27
28
2