Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Garrison S. Johnson v. Cate

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


June 2, 2012

GARRISON S. JOHNSON,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
CATE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS (ECF NOS. 8, 9 & 10) OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN (14) DAYS

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Garrison S. Johnson, a state prisoner proceeding pro se filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff has declined Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (Request for Reassignment, ECF No. 3.)

The Court screened Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (First Am. Compl., ECF No. 8), and ordered him to either file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on his cognizable Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim against Defendant Doran. (Order Requiring Plaintiff Amend or Notify, ECF No. 9.) Plaintiff has notified the Court of his willingness to proceed only on the equal protection claim against Defendant Doran. (Notice, ECF No. 10.)

Accordingly, all claims in Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint except for his Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim against Defendant Doran should now be dismissed. All of the Defendants named in this action except for Defendant Doran should also now be dismissed.

II. ANALYSIS

The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous or malicious," that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(b)(1),(2).

The Court reviewed Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint pursuant to this statute and found a cognizable Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim against Defendant Doran. (Order Requiring Plaintiff Amend or Notify.) Plaintiff failed to state any other cognizable claim. (Id.)

Accordingly, Plaintiff's other claims and all other Defendants should now be dismissed.

III. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, except for the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim against Defendant Doran should now be dismissed. All of the Defendants named in this action except for Defendant Doran should also now be dismissed.

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, except for the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim against Defendant Doran should now be dismissed and that Defendants Cate, Foston, Harrington, Biter,*fn1 and Lawless should also now be dismissed with prejudiceby the District Judge.

These Findings and Recommendations are 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 fourteen (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, any party may file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within ten (10) days after service of the objections. The parties are 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).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.