(PC)Saiz v. Putnam et al

Filing 11

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 11/18/2020 recommending that that all claims and defendants be dismissed, except for Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Putnam and Shrieber re 1 Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint filed by Martin Saiz. referred to Judge Unassigned DJ; Objections to F&R due by 12/7/2020(Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8
9

MARTIN SAIZ,
Plaintiff,

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

v.

Case No. 1:20-cv-01231-EPG (PC)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,
RECOMMENDING THAT CERTAIN
CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS BE
DISMISSED

PUTNAM and SCHRIEBER,
Defendants.

OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN
FOURTEEN DAYS
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ASSIGN
DISTRICT JUDGE

Martin Saiz (“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.
Plaintiff filed his complaint on August 31, 2020. (ECF No. 1). The Court screened

18

Plaintiff’s complaint. (ECF No. 6). The Court found that Plaintiff’s complaint “states

19

cognizable claims against Defendants Putnam and Schrieber for (1) violating his due process

20

rights with respect to housing him in administrative segregation and (2) violating his First

21

Amendment rights by retaliating against him for his protected speech.” (Id. at 9-10).

22

The Court allowed Plaintiff to choose between proceeding only on the claims found

23

cognizable by the Court in the screening order or filing an amended the complaint. (Id. at 11).

24

On November 10, 2020, Plaintiff notified the Court that he wants to proceed only on the claims

25

found cognizable in the screening order. (ECF No. 7).

26

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order that was entered on

27

October 26, 2020 (ECF No. 6), and because Plaintiff has notified the Court that he wants to

28

proceed only on the claims found cognizable in the screening order (ECF No. 7), it is HEREBY
1

1

RECOMMENDED that all claims and defendants be dismissed, except for Plaintiff’s claims

2

against Defendants Putnam and Schrieber for (1) violating his due process rights with respect to

3

housing him in administrative segregation and (2) violating his First Amendment rights by

4

retaliating against him for his protected speech

5

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States district judge

6

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen

7

(14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file

8

written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to

9

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

10

objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v.

11

Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394

12

(9th Cir. 1991)).

13
14

Additionally, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to assign a district
judge to this case.

15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 18, 2020

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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