Allen v. Kramer et al
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS to Dismiss Non-Cognizable Claims with Prejudice, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 9/22/16. Referred to Judge Drozd; 14-Day Deadline. (Verduzco, M)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CASE No. 1:15-cv-01609-DAD-MJS (PC)
NORM KRAMER, et al.,
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENATIONS TO
DISMISS NON-COGNIZABLE CLAIMS
(ECF NO. 1)
Plaintiff is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in a civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On March 28, 2016, the undersigned screened Plaintiff’s complaint and dismissed
it with leave to amend for failure to state a claim. On grant of Plaintiff’s motion for
reconsideration, the undersigned found cognizable a safe conditions claim against
Defendants Mayberg, the Fresno County Board of Supervisors, Kramer, and Ahlin.
However, the Court concluded that all other claims and Defendants were subject to
Plaintiff was informed that he could proceed on his complaint as screened on
reconsideration or file an amended complaint. Plaintiff has now submitted his notice of
intent to proceed only on the cognizable claims.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:
1. Plaintiff proceed on his safe conditions claim against Defendants Mayberg,
Kramer, Ahlin and the Fresno County Board of Supervisors, and
2. All other claims and Defendants be dismissed with prejudice.
The findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District
Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Within fourteen (14) days after being served with the findings and recommendations, the
parties may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned
“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” A party may
respond to another party’s objections by filing a response within fourteen (14) days after
being served with a copy of that party’s objections. The parties are advised that failure to
file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.
Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923
F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
September 22, 2016
Michael J. Seng
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?