(PC)Acquah v. Baughman et al
Filing
14
ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 10/8/2019 ORDERING service is appropriate for A. Herrera, S. Mohr, J. Ortega, R. Valine. The Clerk shall send plaintiff forms for service to be completed and return ed within 30 days, along with the Notice of Submission. The Clerk shall randomly assign a district judge to this case. IT IS RECOMMENDED that plaintiff's claims against defendant Baughman be dismissed for the reasons set forth in the court's 9/18/2019 screening order 10 . Assigned and referred to Judge John A. Mendez; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
KENNETH ALLAN ACQUAH,
12
No. 2:19-cv-1470 DB P
Plaintiff,
13
v.
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
14
DAVID BAUGHMAN, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
18
On screening, this court found plaintiff stated cognizable claims for excessive force against
19
defendants Ortega, Mohr, Valine, and Herrera. (Sept. 18, 2019 Order (ECF No. 10).) This court
20
further found plaintiff failed to state a claim against defendant Baughman. Plaintiff was given the
21
option of amending his complaint or proceeding on the claims found cognizable in his original
22
complaint. In a document filed here on October 3, plaintiff states that he wishes to proceed on his
23
existing claims.
24
Accordingly, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
25
1. Service is appropriate for the following defendants: Ortega, Mohr, Valine, and
26
27
28
Herrera.
2. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff four USM-285 forms, one summons, an
instruction sheet, and a copy of the complaint filed August 29, 2019.
1
1
3. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the attached
2
Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the following documents to the court:
3
a. The completed Notice of Submission of Documents;
4
b. One completed summons;
5
c. One completed USM-285 form for each defendant listed in number 1 above;
6
7
8
9
and
d. Five copies of the endorsed complaint filed August 29, 2019.
4. Plaintiff need not attempt service on defendants and need not request waiver of service.
Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the court will direct the U.S. Marshal to serve
10
the above-named defendants pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 without payment of costs.
11
5. The Clerk of the Court shall randomly assign a district judge to this case.
12
Further, IT IS RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s claims against defendant Baughman be
13
14
dismissed for the reasons set forth in the court’s September 18 screening order (ECF No. 10).
These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge
15
assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days
16
after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections
17
with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings
18
and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified
19
time may result in waiver of the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951
20
F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
21
Dated: October 8, 2019
22
23
24
25
26
27
DLB:9/DB/prisoner-civil rights/acqu1470.1
28
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
KENNETH ALLAN ACQUAH,
12
13
No. 2:19-cv-1470 DB P
Plaintiff,
v.
NOTICE OF SUBMISSION
14
DAVID BAUGHMAN, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
Plaintiff submits the following documents in compliance with the court's order filed
_____________________:
19
____
completed summons form
20
____
completed USM-285 forms
21
____
copies of the Complaint
22
23
DATED:
24
________________________________
Plaintiff
25
26
27
28
1
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?