(PC) Henderson v. CDCR

8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA TOMMY BERNARD HENDERSON, JR., No. 2:23-CV-1536-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF and CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16 Defendants.

18 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 19 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s original complaint, ECF No. 1.

20 On January 19, 2024, the Court issued an order screening Plaintiff’s original complaint. See ECF No. 10. The Court determined that Plaintiff states a cognizable equal protection claim against Defendant John Grant, the Canteen Manager at the California Health Care Facility, based on Plaintiff’s allegation that Defendant Grant treated Plaintiff differently in 2023 with respect to canteen pricing due to Plaintiff’s disability. See id. The Court otherwise determined that Plaintiff’s complaint failed to state any other claim as against Defendant Grant or the other named defendants, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and “Canteen Administrators Personnel.” See id. Plaintiff was provided the option of filing a first amended complaint within 30 days and cautioned that, if he failed to file a first amended | complaint, the action would proceed on his equal protection claim against Defendant Grant only || and that the Court would recommend that all other claims and defendants be dismissed. See id. || To date, Plaintiff has not filed a first amended complaint and the Court be separate order has || directed service on Defendant Grant as to Plaintiffs equal protection claim and herein || recommends dismissal of all other claims and defendants.

6 Accordingly, the undersigned orders and recommends as follows: 7 1. It is ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a | District Judge to this case.

9 2. It is RECOMMENDED that this action proceed on Plaintiffs original || complaint on his equal protection claim against Defendant Grant only and that all other claims || and defendants be DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

12 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.

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

19 | Dated: March 14, 2024 Co 20 DENNIS M. COTA 7] UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE