(PC) Kyle J. Kubes v. California Correctional Institute

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KYLE J. KUBES, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00632-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 13 v. ) RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO THIS ACTION CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL ) INSTITUTION, ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 ) DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIM ) 16 Defendant. ) [ECF Nos. 16, 17] ) 17 ) 18 Plaintiff Kyle J. Kubes is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

20 On July 1, 2020, the undersigned screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found that Plaintiff stated a cognizable claim for deliberate indifference for denial of clean clothing against the unidentified captain, lieutenant Garcia, and unidentified sergeant. (ECF No. 16.) However, Plaintiff was advised that he failed to state a cognizable claim for deliberate indifference for denial of mental health treatment. (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.

26 (Id.) 27 On July 23, 2020, Plaintiff notified the Court of his intent to proceed on the deliberate indifference claim for denial of clean clothing against Defendants lieutenant Garcia, unidentified wOOe □□ OUT SAD MUO tu PO ee oI || captain, and unidentified sergeant. (ECF No. 17.) Accordingly, the Court will recommend that this || action proceed only on Plaintiffs deliberate indifference claim for denial of clean clothing in violatio || 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); Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. || 2010).

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

8 Further, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 9 1. This action proceed against Defendants unidentified captain, lieutenant Garcia, and 10 unidentified sergeant for denial of clean clothing in violation of the Eighth 11 Amendment; and 12 2. Plaintiffs deliberate indifference claim for denial of mental health treatment be 13 dismissed for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief.

14 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)).

22 IT IS SO ORDERED.

A (Fe lI Dated: _ July 27, 2020 OF 24 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE