Jones v. Betti et al

Filing 41

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 4/15/09 RECOMMENDING that Audetta, Bainbridge, Bishop, David, Deforest, Follosco, Ingwerson, Jackson, Lipton, McGuire, Plainer, Spehling, Vicent andWaterman be dismissed from this action. Referred to Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr. Objections due within 20 days.(Dillon, M)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. L. BETTI, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 8, 2008, the court screened plaintiff's complaint, found that it did not state cognizable claims against Audetta, Bainbridge, Bishop, David, Deforest, Follosco, Ingwerson, Jackson, Lipton, McGuire, Plainer, Spehling, Vicent or Waterman. The court explained to plaintiff that he either could proceed with his action solely against defendants Betti, Brautingham, Cunningham, Hunter, Lebeck and Callison, or file an amended complaint in an attempt to state a claim also against the other defendants. On April 7, 2009, plaintiff submitted the documents necessary for service on Betti, Brautingham, Cunningham, Hunter, Lebeck and Callison. The court construes plaintiff's election to proceed solely against defendants Betti, Brautingham, Cunningham, Hunter, Lebeck and Callison as consent to dismissal of all claims
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MALIK JONES, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-08-0096 FCD EFB P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

against Audetta, Bainbridge, Bishop, David, Deforest, Follosco, Ingwerson, Jackson, Lipton, McGuire, Plainer, Spehling, Vicent and Waterman Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that Audetta, Bainbridge, Bishop, David, Deforest, Follosco, Ingwerson, Jackson, Lipton, McGuire, Plainer, Spehling, Vicent and Waterman be dismissed from this action. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated: April 15, 2009.

2