(PC) Soria v. Zuniga

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11 STEVEN SORIA, CASE NO. 1:18-cv-0635-LJO-JLT (PC)

12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO PROCEED ONLY ON COGNIZABLE 13 v. CLAIMS AND TO DISMISS ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS WITHOUT RAFEL ZUNGIA, et al., LEAVE TO AMEND (Doc. 7) 15 Defendants.

FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE 17 The Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found it stated a claim under the Eighth Amendment for denial of medical care against defendants Lt. Herron, Camp Administrator Allison, Dr. Morales, and Case Manager Coordinator R. Gonzales. Insofar as plaintiff sought to assert other claims against these and/or other defendants, the Court determined they were not cognizable. The Court directed the plaintiff to file a notice indicating whether he wished to stand on his pleading, to dismiss this case, or to file another amended pleading. He has now submitted his notice of intent to proceed the claims the Court has found to be cognizable.

24 Accordingly, the Court RECOMMENDS that this action proceed solely on the claims identified above and all other claims and defendants should be dismissed without leave to amend.

26 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 5 (9th Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8 Dated: October 1, 2019 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE