(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)

Download PDF
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?