1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NICHOLAS A. KIMMONS, No. 2:24-cv-01572-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 SACRAMENTO COUNTY MAIN JAIL, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state inmate, proceeds without counsel in an action brought under

1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to

636(b)(1). 20 On June 13, 2025, the court screened plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 21 ECF No. 6. The court found that plaintiff had stated a potentially cognizable excessive force 22 claim against defendant Llamas. It dismissed plaintiff’s remaining claims and granted plaintiff 23 thirty days in which to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies in those claims or 24 advise the court that he wished to proceed on the original complaint (i.e., the potentially 25 cognizable claim against Llamas). Id. 26 The time for acting has now passed and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or 27 otherwise responded to the court’s order. Thus, it appears that plaintiff is unable or unwilling to 28 cure the defects in the complaint. ] Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk of Court randomly assign a district judge to 2 || this action. It is further RECOMMENDED that this action proceed solely on the complaint’s 3 || potentially cognizable excessive force claim against defendant Llamas and that all other claims be 4 || dismissed without prejudice. 5 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 6 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within fourteen days 7 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 8 || objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 9 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 10 || objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 11 | parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 12 || appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan,

, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez 13 | v. Yist,

(9th Cir. 1991).

15 || Dated: September 17, 2025 hile 7 -LZACK □ EDMUND F. BRENNAN 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28