(PC) Saldana v. St. Andre ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SAMUEL SALDANA, No. 2:22-cv-00801-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 ST. ANDRE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in an action brought 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 31, 2022, the court informed plaintiff that he could proceed 19 with a potentially cognizable Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against defendant 20 Gonzales, or he could file an amended complaint in an effort to also state a claim against 21 defendant Kersh. ECF No. 16. Plaintiff has elected not to amend his complaint and to proceed 22 only with the claim identified by the court. ECF No. 17. 23 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court randomly assign a United States 24 District Judge to this case. 25 Further, it is RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s claims against defendant Kersh be 26 dismissed without prejudice. 27 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 1 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 2 || objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 3 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 4 | within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 5 || Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 || Dated: September 21, 2022. 7 Dated Cf nA g EDMUND F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28