(PC) Rogers v. Campbell ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHARLES A. ROGERS, Case No. 1:21-cv-00021-SKO (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS AND 13 v. DEFENDANTS 14 K. CAMPBELL, et al., Clerk of the Court to Assign District Judge 15 Defendants. 14-DAY OBJECTION DEADLINE 16 17 18 Plaintiff Charles A. Rogers is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 19 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 21 On January 31, 2023, this Court issued its Second Screening Order. (Doc. 15.) The Court 22 found Plaintiff’s second amended complaint stated a cognizable First Amendment claim against 23 Defendant K. Campbell but failed to state any other cognizable claims for relief against any other 24 Defendant. (Id. at 9-17.) Plaintiff was given 21 days to elect one of the following options: (1) file 25 a third amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in the order; (2) notify the Court of 26 his willingness to proceed only on the claim found cognizable by the Court; or (3) file a notice of 27 voluntary dismissal. (Id. at 17-18.) // 1 On February 16, 2023, Plaintiff filed notice electing to proceed only on his First 2 Amendment claim against Defendant Campbell. (See Doc. 16.) 3 II. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a district judge to this 5 action. Further, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s Second Screening Order (Doc. 15), the 6 Court RECOMMENDS that: 7 1. Defendants Brian Cates, J. Gutierrez, T. Horn, L. Lundy, Kelly Nouwels, S. Stiles, 8 W.J. Sullivan, J. Vaquera, and T. White be DISMISSED; and 9 2. The claims in Plaintiff’s second amended complaint be DISMISSED, except for the 10 claim alleging a violation of Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights against Defendant K. 11 Campbell. 12 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 13 Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days of the date of 14 service of these Findings and Recommendations, a party may file written objections with the 15 Court. The document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 16 Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of 17 rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. 18 Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 21 Dated: March 6, 2023 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27