Garcia v. Moreno et al
Filing
12
ORDER DIRECTING Clerk of Court to Randomly Assign a District Judge to This Action (This case has been assigned to District Judge Dale A. Drozd and Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone. The new case number is 1:18-cv-14-DAD-SAB); FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending Dismissal of Certain Claims, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 3/13/18. Objections to F&R Due Within Fourteen Days. (Marrujo, C)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
LENIN GARCIA,
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Plaintiff,
v.
E. MORENO, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:18-cv-00014-SAB (PC)
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO
RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO
THIS ACTION
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN
CLAIMS
[ECF Nos. 1, 10, 11]
Plaintiff Lenin Garcia is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983. Plaintiff filed the instant action on December 29, 2017.
On March 2, 2018, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that Plaintiff stated a
20
cognizable claim for failure to protect against Defendants E. Moreno, Pena, H. Hinojosa, Segura and
21
M. Silva, a cognizable claim for excessive force against Defendant Moreno, a cognizable claim for
22
retaliation against Defendants Moreno, Pena, Hinojosa, Segura and E. Silva, and a cognizable claim
23
for failure to decontaminate his cell against Defendants D. Hick, M. Harris, and E. Silva. (ECF No.
24
10.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his intent to
25
proceed on the claims found to be cognizable. (Id.)
26
On March 12, 2018, Plaintiff notified the Court of his intent to proceed only on the claims
27
found to be cognizable. (ECF No. 11.) As a result, the Court will recommend that this action only
28
proceed on the claim identified above, and all other claims be dismissed for the reasons stated in the
1
1
Court’s March 2, 2018 screening order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
2
(2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342
3
(9th Cir. 2010).
4
Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:
5
1.
This action proceed on Plaintiff’s claim against Defendants E. Moreno, Pena, H.
6
Hinojosa, Segura and M. Silva for failure to protect, against Defendant Moreno for
7
excessive force, against Defendants Moreno, Pena, Hinojosa, Segura and E. Silva for
8
retaliation, and against Defendants D. Hick, M. Harris, and E. Silva for failure to
9
decontaminate his cell.
2.
10
All other claims be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be
granted, consistent with the Court’s March 2, 2018 order; and
11
12
3.
The Clerk of Court is directed to randomly assign a District Judge to this action.
13
These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge
14
assigned to the case, pursuant to the provision of 28 U.S.C. §636 (b)(1)(B). Within fourteen (14) days
15
after being served with these Finding and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with
16
the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings and Recommendations.”
17
Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of
18
rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.2d F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v.
19
Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).
20
21
IT IS SO ORDERED.
22
Dated:
23
March 13, 2018
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?