(PC) Hudson v. Vasquezcoy ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 IKEEM JARMER HUDSON, Case No. 1:21-cv-00861-EPG (PC) 11 Plaintiff, 12 ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ASSIGN v. A DISTRICT JUDGE 13 J. VASQUEZCOY, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 RECOMMENDING THAT CERTAIN Defendants. CLAIMS AND A DEFENDANT BE 15 DISMISSED 16 (ECF Nos. 1, 5, 7) 17 OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS 18 19 Plaintiff Ikeem Jarmer Hudson is civilly committed at the Metropolitan State Hospital 20 and proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 21 § 1983. (ECF Nos. 1, 4). Plaintiff filed his complaint on May 28, 2021. (ECF No. 1). The Court 22 screened Plaintiff’s complaint, concluding that only Plaintiff’s excessive-force claim against 23 Defendant J. Vasquezcoy should proceed past screening. (ECF No. 5, p. 13). 24 The Court allowed Plaintiff to choose between proceeding only on the claim found 25 cognizable in the screening order, amending the complaint, or standing on the complaint 26 subject to the Court issuing findings and recommendations to a district judge consistent with 27 the screening order. (Id. at 13-14). On July 23, 2021, Plaintiff notified the Court that he wants 28 to proceed only on the claim found cognizable by the screening order. (ECF No. 7). 1 Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order that was entered on 2 || June 24, 2021 (ECF No. 5), and because Plaintiff has notified the Court that he wants to 3 || proceed only on the claim found cognizable in the screening order (ECF No. 7), it is HEREBY 4 |} RECOMMENDED that all claims and defendants be dismissed, except for Plaintiff's 5 || excessive-force claim against Defendant J. Vasquezcoy. 6 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States district judge 7 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen 8 || (14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file 9 || written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 10 ||judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections 11 || within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 12 || 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 13 |] 1991)). 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 'S ll Dated: _ July 26, 2021 [Je hey — 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28