(PC) Blair v. Pantoja ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARCUS QUINN BLAIR, JR., No. 1:23-cv-00574-SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE 13 v. TO THIS ACTION 14 L. PANTOJA, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF 15 Defendant. CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS 16 (ECF Nos. 14, 15) 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant 19 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 On September 14, 2023, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, and found 21 that he stated cognizable a cognizable excessive force claim against Defendants Pantoja, Barcena, 22 and the unidentified “Doe” officers, and a cognizable failure to intervene claim against 23 Defendants Ybarra, Gentry and Gaines. (ECF No. 14.) However, Plaintiff failed to state any 24 other cognizable claims. Plaintiff was granted the opportunity to file an amended complaint or 25 notify the Court of his intent to proceed on the claims found to be cognizable. (Id.) On October 26 16, 2023, Plaintiff filed a notice of intent to proceed on the claims found to be cognizable. (ECF 27 No. 15.) 28 /// 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall assign a District 2 | Judge to this action. 3 Further, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 4 1. This action proceed against Defendants Pantoja, Barcena, and the unidentified 5 | “Doe” officers for excessive force and against Defendants Ybarra, Gentry and Gaines for failure 6 | to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and 7 2. All other claims and Defendants be dismissed from the action for failure to state a 8 | cognizable claim for relief. 9 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 10 | Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen 11 | (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 12 || objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 13 | Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 14 | specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 15 | 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. DAM Le 1g | Dated: _ October 18, 2023 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28