(PC) Muhammad v. Amaral et al

Filing 34

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/13/20 LIFTING the STAY of this action. Also, RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge William B. Shubb. Objections due within 14 days.(Plummer, M)

Download PDF
Case 2:20-cv-00069-WBS-KJN Document 34 Filed 11/16/20 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANSAR EL MUHAMMAD, 12 13 14 No. 2: 20-cv-0069 WBS KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS KOURTNEE AMARAL, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. On October 22, 2020, the undersigned 18 referred this action to the Post-Screening ADR Project and stayed this action for 120 days. (ECF 19 No. 30.) For the reasons stated herein, the stay is lifted and the undersigned recommends that this 20 action be dismissed. 21 Plaintiff’s complaint was filed with the court on January 9, 2020. (ECF No. 1.) This 22 action proceeds on the amended complaint filed August 10, 2020 against defendant Kourtnee 23 Amaral. (ECF No. 15.) Plaintiff alleges that defendant Amaral violated his Eighth Amendment 24 right to adequate medical care and state law by failing to treat his broken hand on or around 25 August 2018. (Id.) 26 27 The court’s own records reveal that on April 22, 2020, plaintiff filed an amended complaint containing virtually identical allegations against defendant Amaral in 2:19-cv-1289 28 1 Case 2:20-cv-00069-WBS-KJN Document 34 Filed 11/16/20 Page 2 of 2 1 KJM CKD P.1 Due to the duplicative nature of the present action, the court will recommend that 2 this action be dismissed. Plaintiff shall proceed with his claims against defendant Amaral in 3 2:19-cv-1289 KJM CKD P. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the stay in this action is lifted; and 5 IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. 6 P. 41(b). 7 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the District Judge assigned to this 8 case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days after being served 9 with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. 10 The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 11 Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 12 may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 13 Cir. 1991). 14 Dated: November 13, 2020 15 16 17 18 Muh60.dup 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 803 F.2d 500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980). 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?