1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEFFREY D. MCDONALD, No. 2:24-cv-2167-SCR 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer in this civil rights action filed 18 pursuant to

. On May 5, 2025, the court screened the complaint and found that 19 plaintiff’s allegations against defendant Morano stated a First Amendment retaliation claim while 20 his claims against defendants Newsom, Jones, Chaves, and Davis were insufficient. ECF No. 7. 21 Plaintiff was given the option of amending the complaint or proceeding immediately on his 22 cognizable claim against defendant Morano.

. He was further advised that if he failed to 23 notify the court how he wanted to proceed, the court would assume that he was choosing to 24 proceed on the complaint as screened and recommend dismissal without prejudice of defendants 25 Newsom, Jones, Chaves, and Davis.

The time for plaintiff to notify the court as to how he 26 wishes to proceed has now passed, and plaintiff has not made an election or otherwise responded 27 to the order. Thus, the court recommends dismissing defendants Newsom, Jones, Chaves, and 28 Davis from this action. By separate order, the court directs defendant Morano to be electronically 1 | served with the complaint. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly 3 || assign a United States District Judge to this action. 4 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED for the reasons set forth in the May 5, 2025 5 || Screening Order (ECF No. 7 at 3-5), that defendants Newsom, Jones, Chaves, and Davis be 6 || dismissed without prejudice from this action. 7 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 8 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within twenty-one days 9 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 10 | with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judges Findings 11 | and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 12 | time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst,

13 | (9th Cir. 1991). 14 | DATED: June 12, 2025 1 kmh 16 SEAN C. RIORDAN "7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28