(PC) Howell v. Medina ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KAREEM HOWELL, ) Case No.: 1:19-cv-01613-DAD-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 v. ) RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS 14 I. MEDINA, et.al., ) ) 15 Defendants. ) [ECF No. 13] ) 16 ) ) 17 ) 18 Plaintiff Kareem Howell is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant 20 to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On November 21, 2019, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that Plaintiff stated 22 cognizable claims against Defendants I. Medina, J. Fugate and J. Navarro for retaliation in violation of 23 the First Amendment and deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 8.) 24 The Court ordered Plaintiff to either file a first amended complaint or notify the Court in writing of his 25 willingness to proceed only on the cognizable claims. (Id.) 26 After receiving an extension of time, on January 14, 2020, Plaintiff notified the Court of his 27 willingness to proceed only on the cognizable claims identified by the Court on October 4, 2019. 28 (ECF No. 13.) 1 Accordingly, the Court will recommend that this action proceed only against Defendants I. 2 || Medina, J. Fugate and J. Navarro for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and deliberate 3 || indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment, and that all other claims and Defendants be 4 || dismissed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. 5 || Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010). 6 Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 7 1. This action proceed on Plaintiff's complaint, filed on November 14, 2019, (ECF No. 1 8 against Defendants I. Medina, J. Fugate and J. Navarro for retaliation in violation of th 9 First Amendment and deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment; 10 and 11 2. All other claims and Defendants be dismissed from the action for failure to state a 12 cognizable claim for relief. 13 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 14 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen (14) days 15 || after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections 16 || with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 17 Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 18 || result in the waiver of the “right to challenge the magistrate’s factual findings” on appeal. Wilkerson 19 || v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Ci 20 |} 1991)). 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. Al (ee 23 || Dated: _ January 17, 2020 OF 24 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 27 28