Sorrells v. United States Marshals Service et al

Filing 31

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending That 20 First Amended Prisoner Complaint is Appropriate for Service Against Defendants' Captain Horton and Melhoff and Dismissing All Other Claims and Defendants From the Action for Failure to State a Cognizable Claim for Relief, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 9/8/16. Objections to F&R Due Within Thirty Days. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14

15
16
17
18

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE, )
)
et al.,
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
SHANNON SORRELLS,

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00081-DAD-SAB (PC)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDING THAT FIRST AMENDED
COMPLAINT IS APPROPRIATE FOR SERVICE
AGAINST DEFENDANTS CAPTAIN HORTON
AND MELHOFF AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER
CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS FROM THE
ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A
COGNIZABLE CLAIM FOR RELIEF
[ECF Nos. 20, 22, 30]

Plaintiff Shannon Sorrells is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

19

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff declined magistrate judge jurisdiction, and this matter was

20

therefore referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(1)(B) and Local

21

Rule 302.

22

On February 12, 2016, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A

23

and found that it failed to state any cognizable claims for relief. Plaintiff was granted leave to file an

24

amended complaint within thirty days. Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on April 6, 2016. On

25

July 15, 2016, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found that it stated a

26

cognizable claim for denial of appropriate medical care in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

27

Plaintiff was ordered to file a second amended complaint or notify the Court of his intent to proceed

28

on the claim found to be cognizable. After receiving an extension of time, on September 6, 2016,
1

1

Plaintiff filed a notice of his intent to proceed only on the claim found to be cognizable. (ECF No.

2

30.)

3

Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action proceed against Defendants

4

Captain Horton and Melhoff for denial of medical care in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and

5

all other claims and defendants be dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for

6

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

7
8

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within thirty (30) days after

9

being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the

10

Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

11

Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may

12

result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014)

13

(citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

14

15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

Dated:

17

September 8, 2016
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2