(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 J. HOWELL, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00114-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 13 v. ) RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO THIS ACTION 14 MEDINA, et.al., ) ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 15 Defendants. ) RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN ) CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS 16 ) ) [ECF Nos. 12, 13] 17 ) ) 18 Plaintiff Kareen J. Howell is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 On February 4, 2020, the undersigned screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that Plaintiff 21 stated a cognizable retaliation claim against Defendants Medina, Bennett, J. Burnes, J. Navarro, A. 22 Randolph, and J. Gallagher. (ECF No. 12.) The Court granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended 23 complaint or notify the Court of intent to proceed only on the claim found to be cognizable. (Id.) 24 On February 20, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice of intent to proceed on the retaliation claim found 25 to be cognizable and dismiss all other claims and Defendants. (ECF No. 13.) Accordingly, the Court 26 will recommend that this action proceed against Defendants Medina, Bennett, J. Burnes, J. Navarro, 27 A. Randolph, and J. Gallagher for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment , and all other claims 28 1 || for relief be dismissed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Bell Atlant 2 || Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010). 3 Based on the foregoing, the Court HEREBY ORDERS the Clerk of the Court to randomly 4 || assign a Fresno District Judge to this action. 5 Furthermore, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 6 1. This action proceed against Defendants Medina, Bennett, J. Burnes, J. Navarro, A. 7 Randolph, and J. Gallagher for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment; 8 2. All other claims and Defendants be dismissed from the action; and 9 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to randomly assign a District Judge to this action. 10 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 11 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen (14) days 12 || after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections 13 || with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 14 || Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 15 || result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) 16 || (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. Al (ee 19 || Dated: _ February 21, 2020 OF 20 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28