1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL E. JACQUES, No. 2:23-cv-0345 TLN AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 JEFF MACOMBER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42

. On September 23, 2024, the court screened the complaint and found that plaintiff 19 had stated cognizable Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against defendants Franceschi 20 and Lynch in their individual capacities and against Lynch in his official capacity, but that her 21 claims against Franceschi in her official capacity and all claims against Macomber were 22 insufficient to proceed. ECF No. 10. Plaintiff was given the options of amending the complaint 23 or proceeding immediately on her cognizable claims against defendants Franceschi and Lynch. 24

. She was further advised that if she failed to notify the court how she wanted to 25 proceed, the court would assume that she was choosing to proceed on the complaint as screened. 26

. The time for plaintiff to notify the court as to how she wishes to proceed has now 27 passed, and plaintiff has not made an election or otherwise responded to the order. 28 //// ] Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED that for the reasons set forth in the September 23, 2 | 2024 Screening Order (ECF No. 10 at 4-6), the official capacity claims against defendant 3 || Franceschi and all claims against defendant Macomber be dismissed without prejudice. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within twenty-one days 6 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 7 || with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judges Findings 8 || and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 9 || time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst,

10 | (9th Cir. 1991). 11 | DATED: December 4, 2024 Atter— Lhar—e_ 12 ALLISON CLAIRE 3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28