Aleman v. North Kern State Prison, et al.

Filing 15

ORDER that this action proceed only on Plaintiff's failure to protect claim and that all other claims and Defendants are dismissed signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 10/25/2016. Defendants, S. Alfaro and North Kern State Prison dismissed. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

HECTOR ALEMAN,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

vs.
NORTH KERN STATE PRISON, et al.,

1:15-cv-01293-EPG-PC
ORDER THAT THIS ACTION PROCEED
ONLY ON PLAINTIFF=S FAILURE TO
PROTECT CLAIM AND THAT ALL OTHER
CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS ARE
DISMISSED

Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Hector Aleman (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis
in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 21, 2015, Plaintiff filed the
Complaint commencing this action. (ECF No. 1.) On October 6, 2016, this Court issued a
screening order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915A and found that it states a cognizable claim for
failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Rentieria, Ledesma,
Nuno, Fierros, Montalvo, Acosta, and Garcia. (ECF No. 13.) The Court also found that
Plaintiff failed to state any other cognizable claims. (Id.)
Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint or notify the Court that he is
willing to proceed only on the claims found cognizable by the Court, subject to an order that
the non-cognizable claims be dismissed from the action. (Id.) On October 24, 2016, Plaintiff

28
1

1

filed a notice informing the Court that he is willing to proceed only on the cognizable Eighth

2

Amendment claim for failure to protect. (ECF No. 14.)

3

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

4

1.

This action proceeds only against Defendants Rentieria, Ledesma, Nuno,
Fierros, Montalvo, Acosta, and Garcia on Plaintiff’s failure to protect claim;

5
6

2.

All remaining claims and Defendants are dismissed from this action; and

7

3.

Plaintiff’s claims concerning the grievance process are dismissed from this
action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim.

8
9
10
11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

October 25, 2016

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2