1 2 3

4

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7

8 ISSAC LAMAAR MONTGOMERY, Case No. 1:25-cv-00708-KES-EPG (PC) 9 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 THAT THIS CASE PROCEED ONLY ON v. PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS FOR FAILURE TO 11 PROTECT AND CONDITIONS OF CDCR, et al., CONFINEMENT IN VIOLATION OF THE 12 EIGHTH AMENDMENT AGAINST Defendants. DEFENDANTS GONZLEZ AND DOES 1- 13 10 AND TO DISMISS ALL CLAIMS BROUGHT AGAINST DEFENDANT CDCR 14 (ECF Nos. 1, 10, 12) 15

16 OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN 30 DAYS 17 18 Plaintiff Issac Lamaar Montgomery is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 19 pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to

. (ECF Nos. 1, 7). In his 20 complaint filed on June 11, 2025, Plaintiff alleges that his constitutional rights were violated 21 when Defendants failed to provide protective equipment to clean up a deceased inmate’s blood 22 and bodily fluids. (ECF No. 1 at p. 8). 23 On October 29, 2025, the Court screened the complaint, concluding that Plaintiff 24 sufficiently stated claims for conditions of confinement and failure to protect against 25 Defendants Gonzalez and Does 1-10. (ECF No. 10). The Court explained why the complaint 26 otherwise failed to state any claims against the remaining Defendant, CDCR, and gave Plaintiff 27 thirty days to either file (1) a notice to go forward on his cognizable claims, (2) an amended 28 complaint; or (3) a notice to stand on his complaint and have it reviewed by a district judge. 1 On November 14, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice stating that he wants to proceed only on 2 || the claims that the Court found cognizable. (ECF No. 12). 3 Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order (ECF No. 12), and 4 || because Plaintiff has notified the Court that he wants to proceed on the claims that the Court 5 || found should proceed past screening (ECF No. 12), IT IS RECOMMENDED that all claims 6 || against Defendant CDCR be dismissed. 7 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 8 || Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title

(b)(1). Within 9 || thirty (30) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file 10 || written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 11 || Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any objections shall be limited to no more than 15 12 || pages, including exhibits. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 13 || time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler,

, 838-39 14 || (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan,

(9th Cir. 1991)). 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Il Dated: _ November 21, 2025 [sf ey 18 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28