IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 4, 2011
TONY ASBERRY, PLAINTIFF,
MATHEW CATE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Pursuant to this court's screening of plaintiff's original complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), the court found that the complaint may state cognizable claims against defendants Hernandez and Phelps, but did not state a claim against Cate, Walker, Bauser, O'Brien, or Does 1-10. (See Dkt. Nos. 7, 12.) The court gave plaintiff the option of proceeding on his original complaint or filing an amended complaint that added a cognizable claim against defendants Cate, Walker, Bauser, O'Brien, or Does 1-10. (Dkt. Nos. 7, 12, 15.) Plaintiff has now chosen to proceed on his original complaint against defendants Hernandez and Phelps, effectively choosing to terminate this action against Cate, Walker, Bauser, O'Brien, and Does 1-10. (Dkt. No. 17.)
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendants Cate, Walker, Bauser, O'Brien, and Does 1-10, be dismissed from this action without prejudice.
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)(l). Within 21 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." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.