Germany v. Coelho, et al.
Filing
15
ORDER Directing that Action Proceed Against Defendants Hanson, Coelho, Garcia-Fernandez, and Ward for Excessive Force in Violations of the Eighth Amendment and Dismissing all other Claims and Defendants signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 07/12/2017. (Flores, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
FRANKIE L. GERMANY,
12
13
14
15
Plaintiff,
v.
M. COELHO, et al.,
Defendants.
16
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:17-cv-00005-SAB (PC)
ORDER DIRECTING THAT ACTION PROCEED
AGAINST DEFENDANTS DEFENDANTS
HANSON, COELHO, GARCIA-FERNANDEZ,
AND WARD FOR EXCESSIVE FORCE IN
VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT
AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND
DEFENDANTS
(ECF Nos. 12, 13, 14)
17
Plaintiff Frankie L. Germany is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights
18
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Plaintiff consented to the
19
jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge on March 21, 2017. Local Rule 302.
20
On June 27, 2017, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found that
21
Plaintiff stated a cognizable claim against Correctional Officer Ward, Correctional Officer Garcia-
22
Fernandez, Sergeant Hanson, and Correctional Officer Coelho for excessive force in violation of the
23
Eighth Amendment.
24
notifying the Court of his intent to proceed only on the excessive force claims against Correctional
25
Officer Ward, Correctional Officer Garcia-Fernandez, Sergeant Hanson, and Correctional Officer
26
Coelho. On July 10, 2017, Plaintiff filed a notice informing the Court that he did not wish to amend
27
his complaint and wanted to proceed on those claims found to be cognizable in the June 27, 2017
28
screening order.
The Court granted Plaintiff the option of filing an amended complaint or
1
1
Accordingly, based on Plaintiff’s notice, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that:
2
1.
This action shall procced against Defendants Ward, Garcia-Fernandez, Hanson, and
Coelho for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment;
3
2.
4
Plaintiff’s deliberate indifference claim is dismissed from this action for failure to state
a claim; and
5
3.
6
Defendant Negre is dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a
cognizable claim.
7
8
9
10
11
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
July 12, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?