(PC) Cruz v. Baker ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GUILLERMO TRUJILLO CRUZ, 1:19-cv-00995-DAD-GSA-PC 12 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Plaintiff, THAT THIS CASE PROCEED WITH 13 ORIGINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST vs. DEFENDANT C/O B. BAKER FOR USE OF 14 EXCESSIVE FORCE, AND THAT ALL B. BAKER, OTHER CLAIMS BE DISMISSED 15 (ECF No. 22.) Defendant. 16 OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS 17 18 19 Guillermo Trujillo Cruz (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 20 pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the 21 Complaint commencing this action on July 19, 2019. (ECF No. 1.) The Complaint names only 22 one defendant, C/O B. Baker and brings claims for retaliation and excessive force in violation of 23 the Eighth Amendment. (Id.) 24 On September 1, 2020, the court screened the Complaint and found that Plaintiff states a 25 cognizable excessive force claim against defendant Baker, but found no other claims upon which 26 relief may be granted. The court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to either file an amended 27 complaint or notify the court that he is willing to proceed only with the excessive force claim. 28 (ECF No. 18.) 1 On September 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice that he is willing to proceed only with the 2 cognizable excessive force claim. (ECF No. 19.) 3 Therefore, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 4 1. This action proceed only on Plaintiff’s excessive force claim against defendant 5 C/O B. Baker; 6 2. All remaining claims be dismissed from this action; 7 3. Plaintiff’s claim for retaliation be dismissed from this action, based on Plaintiff's 8 failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; and 9 4. This case be referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings, 10 including initiation of service of process. 11 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 12 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 13 fourteen (14) days after the date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff 14 may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to 15 Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 16 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 17 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 20 Dated: September 21, 2020 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28