(PC) McCoy v. Torres ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 AARON D. MCCOY, Case No. 1:19-cv-01023-JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS DEFENDANT 13 v. 14 D. TORRES, et al., 14-DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendants. Clerk of the Court to assign a District Judge 16 17 On February 12, 2020, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1) and found that it 18 states cognizable claims against D. Torres, R. Jolly, R. Cavazos, and A. Balkind, but not against 19 C. Pfeiffer. (Doc. 11.) The Court therefore directed Plaintiff to file a first amended complaint 20 curing the deficiencies identified in its order or notify the Court that he wishes to proceed only on 21 the claims found cognizable. (Id. at 9.) 22 In response to the Court’s screening order, Plaintiff filed a notice that he “wishes to 23 proceed only on his claims against defendants Balkind, Cavazos, Jolly, and Torres, and to dismiss 24 Pfeiffer (Warden).” (Doc. 14.) Accordingly, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening 25 order (Doc. 11), the Court RECOMMENDS that Defendant Pfeiffer be DISMISSED. The Court 26 DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to assign a District Judge to this action. 27 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days of 1 the date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections 2 with the Court. The document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 3 and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver 4 of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. 5 Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 Dated: April 7, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27