(PC) Brenner v. Shirley

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ZACHARY WILL BRENNER, Case No.: 1:24-cv-000545-SKO 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS 13 v. 14-DAY OBJECTION DEADLINE HEATHER SHIRLEY, et al., Clerk of the Court to Assign District Judge 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff Zachary Will Brenner is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

19 I. RELEVANT BACKGROUND 20 Plaintiff filed his complaint on May 8, 2024. (Doc. 1.) On July 26, 2024, this Court issued its First Screening Order. (Doc. 9.) The Court found Plaintiff’s complaint plausibly alleges Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claims against Defendants Shirley, Cronjager, and DeGough, but fails to allege any other cognizable claim against those individuals. (Id. at 4-10.)

24 Plaintiff was ordered to do one of the following within 21 days of the date of service of the order: (1) notify the Court he did not wish to file a first amended complaint and was willing to proceed on his cognizable claims; or (2) file a first amended complaint; or (3) file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Id. at 11-12.)

1 On August 14, 2024, Plaintiff filed written notice indicating he did not wish to file a first amended complaint and was willing to proceed on the Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claims against Defendants. (See Doc. 10.)

4 II. DISCUSSION 5 For the reasons set forth in the Court’s First Screening Order (Doc. 9) issued July 26, 2024, the Court will recommend this that action proceed on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claims against Defendants Shirley, Cronjager, and DeGough only, the remaining claims against any defendant to be dismissed.

9 III. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the Clerk of the Court to randomly assign a District Judge to this action.

12 Further, the Court RECOMMENDS that: 13 1. This action PROCEED only on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment conditions of 14 confinement claims against Defendants Shirley, Cronjager, and DeGough; and 15 2. Any remaining claims in Plaintiff’s complaint against any defendant be DISMISSED.

16 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the district judge assigned to this case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days of the date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, a party 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.

25 Dated: August 15, 2024 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE