Berry v. Yosemite Community College District et al

Filing 10

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that this action proceed only on certain claims and certain defendants; this matter be referred back to the undersigned for further proceedings including service of process re 1 Complaint ;referred to Judge O'Neill,signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 04/30/17. Objections to F&R : (14-Day Deadline) (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

DEBRA BERRY,

10
11
12
13
14

CASE NO. 1:16-cv-00411-LJO-MJS (PC)
Plaintiff,

v.
YOSEMITE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICT, et al.,
Defendants.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ACTION
PROCEED ONLY ON COGNIZABLE
CLAIMS AND THAT ALL OTHER CLAIMS
AND DEFENDANTS BE DISMISSED
(ECF NO. 1)
FOURTEEN
DEADLINE

15

(14)

DAY

OBJECTION

16
17
18

Plaintiff Debra Berry proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights

19

action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,

20

42 U.S.C. § 2000d

21

On March 7, 2017, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and concluded that it

22

stated the following cognizable claims: (1) a Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection

23

claim for compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants Jordan, Bambrosia,

24

Carol, McCarthy, and Marks, in their individual capacities, and for injunctive relief in their

25

official capacities; (2) a First Amendment retaliation claim for compensatory and punitive

26

damages against Defendant Marks in his individual capacity; (3) a Title VI intentional

27

discrimination claim for injunctive relief and compensatory damages against YCCD and

28

1

MJC; and (4) a Title VI retaliation claim for injunctive relief and compensatory damages

2

against YCCD and MJC. The remaining claims were not cognizable as pled. (ECF No.

3

6.)

4

Plaintiff was ordered to file an amended complaint or notify the Court in writing of

5

her willingness to proceed only on the cognizable claims. (Id.) Plaintiff responded with a

6

notice that she is willing to proceed only on the cognizable claims. (ECF No. 8.)

7
8
9

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:
1. This action proceed only on the following claims: (1) a Fourteenth
Amendment Equal Protection claim for compensatory and punitive

10

damages against Defendants Jordan, Bambrosia, Carol, McCarthy, and

11

Marks, in their individual capacities, and for injunctive relief in their

12

official capacities; (2) a First Amendment retaliation claim for

13

compensatory and punitive damages against Defendant Marks in his

14

individual capacity; (3) a Title VI intentional discrimination claim for

15

injunctive relief and compensatory damages against YCCD and MJC;

16

and (4) a Title VI retaliation claim for injunctive relief and compensatory

17

damages against YCCD and MJC;

18
19
20
21

2. All other claims and defendants be dismissed from this action for failure
to state a claim; and
3. The matter be referred back to the undersigned for further proceedings
including service of process.

22

These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States

23

District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C.

24

§ 636(b)(1). Within fourteen (14) days after being served with the findings and

25

recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. The document

26

should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.”

27

Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the

28
2

1

waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014)

2

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

3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

April 30, 2017

/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
3