(PC) Perkins v. Rivera

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GARY RONNELL PERKINS, Case No. 1:24-cv-01497-KES-EPG (PC) Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11 THAT THIS CASE PROCEED ONLY ON v. PLAINTIFF’S RETALIATION CLAIM I. RIVERA, (ECF Nos. 1, 9, 10) Defendant.

14 OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN 30 DAYS Plaintiff Gary Ronnell Perkins proceeds pro se in this civil rights action filed under 42 17 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1). The complaint generally alleges that Defendant Rivera improperly confiscated Plaintiff’s approved special purchase order of handicraft items, and also confiscated other items in retaliation for Plaintiff threatening to file a grievance.

On May 6, 2025, the Court screened the complaint, concluding that Plaintiff sufficiently stated a claim for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment against Defendant Rivera. (ECF No. 1). The Court explained why the complaint otherwise failed to state any claims and gave Plaintiff thirty days to either file (1) a notice to go forward on his cognizable claim, (2) an amended complaint; or (3) a notice to stand on his complaint and have it reviewed by a district judge. (Id.).

On May 15, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice stating that he wants to proceed only on the retaliation claim that the Court found cognizable. (ECF No. 10).

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order that was entered on || May 6, 2025 (ECF No. 9), and because Plaintiff has notified the Court that he wants to proceed || only on the retaliation claim that the Court found should proceed past screening (ECF No. 10), || IT IS RECOMMENDED that all claims other than Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation 4 against Defendant Rivera be dismissed.

5 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District || Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within || thirty (30) 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.” Any objections shall be limited to no || more than 15 pages, including exhibits. 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 12 || 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

14 IT IS SO ORDERED.

1S ll Dated: _May 30, 2025 [see hey 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE