(PC) Suarez v. Clark ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE ALFREDO SUAREZ, ) Case No.: 1:22-cv-00160-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 13 v. ) RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO THIS ACTION 14 KEN CLARK, et al., ) ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendants. ) RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN ) DEFENDANTS AND CLAIMS 16 ) ) (ECF No. 13) 17 ) 18 Plaintiff Jose Alfredo Suarez is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 19 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 On March 25, 2022, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint, and found that he stated a 21 cognizable excessive force claim against Defendant O. Valladolid, a cognizable failure to intervene claim 22 against Defendants B. Camargo, Gamboa, and John Doe No. 4, and a cognizable retaliation claim against 23 Defendant Gamboa. (ECF No. 13.) Plaintiff was granted the opportunity to file an amended complaint 24 or notify the Court of his intent to proceed on the claims found to be cognizable. (Id.) On April 11, 25 2022, Plaintiff filed a notice of intent to proceed on the claims found to be cognizable. (ECF No. 14.) 26 /// 27 /// 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 on Plaintiffs excessive force claim against Defendant O. Valladoli 5 failure to intervene claim against Defendants B. Camargo, Gamboa, and John Doe No. 4, 6 and retaliation claim against Defendant Gamboa; and 7 2. All other Defendants and claims be dismissed from the action for failure to state a g cognizable claim for relief. 9 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 10 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen (14) days 11 after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections 12 || with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 13 || Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 14 || tesult in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) 15 (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 16 17 |{1T IS SO ORDERED. A (Fe 18 Dated: _ April 13, 2022 OF 19 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28