(PC) Bland v. Moffett

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JOSHUA BLAND, Case No. 1:19-cv-01750-SKO (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS AND 13 v. DEFENDANTS D. MOFFETT, et al., 14-DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendants.

Clerk of the Court to Assign a District Judge 17 On April 6, 2020, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and found that it states a cognizable retaliation claim against Defendant Moffett and cognizable failure to protect claims against Defendants Jaime and Stark. (Doc. 8.) The Court found that Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state cognizable claims against the remaining defendants. (Id.) Therefore, the Court directed Plaintiff, within 21 days, to file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in its order or notify the Court that he wishes to proceed only on the claims found cognizable. (Id. at 7.) The Court cautioned Plaintiff that failure to comply with its order would result in a recommendation that this action proceed only on the claims found cognizable and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed with prejudice. (Id. at 8.)

26 Although more than 21 days have passed, Plaintiff has failed to respond to the Court’s order.

27 Accordingly, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order (Doc. 8), the Court RECOMMENDS that: 1 1. Defendants Bryan, Castellanos, Luna, Stane, and California Department of 2 Corrections and Rehabilitation be DISMISSED; and, 3 2. All claims in Plaintiff’s complaint be DISMISSED, except for the retaliation claim 4 against Defendant Moffett and the failure to protect claims against Defendants 5 Jaime and Stark.

6 The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to assign a district judge to this action.

7 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days of the date of service of 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.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sheila K. Oberto Dated: May 22, 2020 /s/ .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE