Callins v. Stainer et al
Filing
21
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS; OBJECTIONS, If Any, Due Within Fourteen Days; ORDER DIRECTING Clerk to Assign District Judge - CASE ASSIGNED to District Judge Dale A. Drozd and Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean. New Case No. 1:17-cv-00840 DAD EPG (PC), signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 6/20/2018. (Hellings, J)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
10
CARLTON R. CALLINS,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 1:17-cv-00840-EPG (PC)
19
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,
RECOMMENDING THAT ALL CLAIMS
AND DEFENDANTS BE DISMISSED,
EXCEPT FOR PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS
AGAINST DEFENDANT C. KYT FOR
VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH
AMENDMENT FOR SEXUAL
HARASSMENT AND/OR ASSAULT;
AGAINST DEFENDANTS GARRISON,
ZAMORA, MANSON, PFEIFFER, AND
DUNCAN FOR FAILURE TO PROTECT
IN VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH
AMENDMENT; AND AGAINST
DEFENDANTS J. CERVANTES, J.
GUZMAN, J. PENA, J. LOPEZ, I.
PADILLA, AND J. ESCUTIA FOR
EXCESSIVE FORCE IN VIOLATION OF
THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT
20
(ECF NOS. 1 & 18)
21
OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN
FOURTEEN DAYS
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
22
23
24
25
v.
M. D. STAINER, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ASSIGN
DISTRICT JUDGE
Carlton Callins (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis
in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
26
Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action on June 23, 2017. (ECF No. 1).
27
The Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint. (ECF No. 18). The Court found that Plaintiff stated
28
“cognizable claims against Defendant C. Kyt for violation of the Eighth amendment for sexual
1
1
harassment and/or assault; against Defendants Garrison, Zamora, Manson, Pfeiffer, and Duncan
2
for failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against Defendants J.
3
Cervantes, J. Guzman, J. Pena, J. Lopez, I. Padilla, and J. Escutia for excessive force in
4
violation of the Eighth Amendment.” (Id. at 10). The Court also found that Plaintiff failed to
5
state any other cognizable claims. (Id).
6
The Court allowed Plaintiff to choose between proceeding only on the claims found
7
cognizable by the Court in the screening order, amending the complaint, or standing on the
8
complaint subject to the Court issuing findings and recommendations to a district judge
9
consistent with the screening order. (Id. at 12). On June 18, 2018, Plaintiff notified the Court
10
that he is willing to proceed only on the claims found cognizable in the screening order. (ECF
11
No. 19).
12
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order that was entered on
13
May 21, 2018 (ECF No. 18), and because Plaintiff has notified the Court that he is willing to
14
proceed only on the claims found cognizable by the Court (ECF No. 19), it is HEREBY
15
RECOMMENDED that all claims and defendants be dismissed, except for Plaintiff’s claims
16
against Defendant C. Kyt for violation of the Eighth amendment for sexual harassment and/or
17
assault; against Defendants Garrison, Zamora, Manson, Pfeiffer, and Duncan for failure to
18
protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against Defendants J. Cervantes, J. Guzman,
19
J. Pena, J. Lopez, I. Padilla, and J. Escutia for excessive force in violation of the Eighth
20
Amendment.
21
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States district judge
22
assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen
23
(14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file
24
written objections with the Court.
25
Magistrate Judge=s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file
26
objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v.
27
Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394
28
(9th Cir. 1991)).
The document should be captioned “Objections to
2
1
2
Additionally, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to assign a district
judge to this case.
3
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
June 20, 2018
/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?