UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 31, 2013
R. CORTEZ, ET AL.,
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 No. 17)
Plaintiff Michael Gonzales is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On December 26, 2012, after reviewing Plaintiff's Complaint, the Court ordered Plaintiff to either file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on his Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Defendant Castro. (ECF No. 16.) On January 7, 2013, Plaintiff notified the Court of his willingness to forgo an amended complaint and proceed with his Eighth Amendment claim. (ECF No. 17.)
Accordingly, all claims and Defendants in Plaintiffs Complaint, except for his Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Defendant Castro, should now be dismissed.
The Court hereby RECOMMENDS the following:
1. Plaintiff be allowed to proceed on his Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Defendant Castro;
2. Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Decanto, Cortez, Murrietta, Fernandez, Ortega, and Castro based on unauthorized medication be dismissed;
3. Plaintiff's First Amendment access to courts claims against Defendant Neri be dismissed;
4. Plaintiff's First Amendment mail claim against Defendants Cortez, Fernandez, Ortega, and Castro be dismissed;
5. Plaintiff's Due Process claim against Defendants Cortez, Fernandez, Ortega, and Castro be dismissed;
6. Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant Cortez be dismissed; and
6. Defendants Cortez, Murrieta, Decanto, Neri, Hernandez, Fernandez, and Ortega be dismissed from the action.
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. Y1 st, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.