(PC) Porter v. Hamman

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KEVIN LAMAR PORTER, No. 1:23-cv-01468-SAB (PC) 8 Plaintiff, ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 9 v. (ECF No. 10) VIVIAN HAMMAN, et al.

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 11 Defendants. RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO THIS ACTION FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN CLAIM (ECF No. 11) Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 17 U.S.C. § 1983.

On November 22, 2023, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint, found that he stated a cognizable retaliation and Bane Act violation against Defendant Hamman, and granted Plaintiff thirty days to either file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his intent to proceed only on the claims found to be cognizable. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his intent to proceed only on the cognizable claims. Therefore, on January 2, 2024, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the action should not be dismissed. (ECF No. 9.)

On January 10, 2024, Plaintiff filed a response to the order to show cause indicating that never received the Court’s November 22, 2023, order and he has been receiving mental health care. (ECF No. 11.) Plaintiff also states that he wishes to proceed on the claims found to be | cognizable and dismiss all other claims. (Id. at 2.) Accordingly, the Court will discharge the | order to show cause and recommend that this action proceed on Plaintiffs retaliation and Bane | Act claims.

4 Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. The order to show cause issued on January 2, 2024 (ECF No. 9) is | DISCHARGED; and 7 2. The Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a District Judge to this action.

8 Further, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 9 1. This action proceed on Plaintiff's retaliation and Bane Act claims against || Defendant Hamman; and 11 2. All other claims be dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable | claim for relief.

13 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)).

IT IS SO ORDERED. DAM Le | Dated: _January 11, 2024 __ Of 33 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE