(PC) Williams v. Petras

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA THEAUDRA CONRAD WILLIAMS, No. 2:19-cv-0605 KJM DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OGNJEN PETRAS, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Following the August 6, 2019, screening of plaintiff’s complaint, plaintiff filed a notice of his willingness to proceed on the sole claim found to be cognizable. (ECF Nos. 10, 13.)

21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action proceed on an Eighth Amendment medical indifference claim against Defendant Dr. Ognjen Petras for the reasons set forth in the Screening Order. All other claims and defendants should be dismissed.

24 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). 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 the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 2 | 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

3 | Dated: January 27, 2020 6 ‘BORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE /DLB7: g |) DB/Inbox/Routine/will0605.fr.scrn