(PC) Snowden v. Sullivan

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DANIEL L. SNOWDEN, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00415-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 13 v. ) RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO THIS ACTION W. SULLIVAN, et al., ) ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 15 Defendants. ) RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN ) DEFENDANTS 16 ) ) [ECF Nos. 11, 12] 17 ) 18 Plaintiff Daniel L. Snowden is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

20 On June 26, 2020, the undersigned screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found that Plaintiff stated a cognizable claim for deliberate indifference against Defendants Angel Ribera and Jerrick Block. (ECF No. 11.) However, Plaintiff was advised that he failed to state a cognizable claim against Defendants Sullivan and Schuyler. (Id.) Therefore, Plaintiff was advised that he could file an amended complaint or a notice of intent to proceed on the claim found to be cognizable or file a second amended complaint. (Id.) 26 On July 9. 2020, Plaintiff notified the Court of his intent to proceed on the deliberate indifference claim against Defendants Angel Ribera and Jerrick Block. (ECF No. 12.) Accordingly, the Court will recommend that this action proceed against Defendants Angel Ribera and Jerrick Block wOASe LOU INN SPA MMU OO er AY ev || for deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Ashcroft v. || Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); □□□□□ || Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010).

4 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to randomly assign a District || Judge to this action.

6 Further, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 7 1. This action proceed against Defendants Angel Ribera and Jerrick Block for □□□□□□□□□□□ 8 and deliberate indifference; and 9 2. Defendants Sullivan and Schuyler be dismissed for failure to state a cognizable claim 10 for relief.

11 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)(). Within fourteen (14) 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 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) || (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

19 IT IS SO ORDERED.

A (Fe || Dated: _ July 14, 2020 F- UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE