(PC) Vega v. Solano County Jail

8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ELISSIA SALUD VEGA, No. 2:23-CV-1074-KJM-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SOLANO COUNTY JAIL, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s original complaint, ECF No. 1.

19 On July 24, 2023, the Court issued an order addressing the sufficiency of Plaintiff’s complaint. See ECF No. 9. The Court determined that Plaintiff’s complaint states cognizable Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Merrick based on Plaintiff being shot with a taser by Defendant and Defendant failing to prevent a physical altercation at the Solano County Justice Center. See id. The Court also determined that Plaintiff’s remaining claims relating to medical care and conditions of confinement, as well as Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Solano County Jail, are insufficient. See id. Plaintiff was provided leave to amend and cautioned that, if no amended complaint was filed within the 30-day time period provided therefor, the action would proceed on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Merrick based on the taser incident and failure to prevent an altercation and that the Court would || recommend that all other claims and defendants be dismissed. See id. As of November 2, 2023, | Plaintiff had not filed an amended complaint and the Court directed service on Defendant Merrick || consistent with the August 8, 2023, order. See ECF Nos. 11 and 13. The Court now recommends | dismissal of all remaining claims and defendants.

5 Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends as follows: 6 1. This action proceed on Plaintiff's complaint, ECF No. 1, as to □□□□□□□□□□□ || Eighth Amendment claims against Defendant Merrick based on Plaintiff being shot with a taser | by Defendant and Defendant failing to prevent an altercation.

9 2. Plaintiffs claims relating to medical care and conditions of confinement be || DISMISSED for failure to state a claim.

11 3. Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Solano County Jail be DISMISSED fot | failure to state a claim.

13 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District || Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).. Within 14 days || after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections || with the Court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of objections.

17 | Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal. See Martinez v. | Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

20 | Dated: January 11, 2024 Co 21 DENNIS M. COTA 02 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE