(PC) Gallegos v. CDCR ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BENJAMIN ROBERT GALLEGOS, No. 2:22-cv-01790-DAD-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND 15 REHABILITATION, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 On March 10, 2023, the court informed plaintiff that he could proceed with a potentially 20 cognizable Fourteenth Amendment right to marry claim against defendant Ebert or he could file 21 an amended complaint in an effort to state additional claims against defendants the State of 22 California, CDCR, CMF, Warden Cuevas, Vasquez, CSP-Sac, Meadows, and Rojas. ECF No. 23 16. Plaintiff has elected not to amend his complaint and to proceed only with the claim identified 24 by the court. ECF No. 20. 25 Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s claims against defendants other than 26 Ebert, including the State of California, CDCR, CMF, Warden Cuevas, Vasquez, CSP-Sac, 27 Meadows, and Rojas, be dismissed without prejudice. 28 ///// ] These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 2 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days 3 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 4 || objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 5 || “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 6 || within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 7 || Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 9 | Dated: June 30, 2023. □□ PDEA 10 EDMUND F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28