(PC) Wilson v. Mercado ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAVID WAYNE WILSON, ) Case No.: 1:22-cv-00278-DAD-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 v. ) RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS 14 GABINO MERCADO, et al., ) ) (ECF Nos. 15, 17) 15 Defendants. ) ) 16 ) 17 Plaintiff David Wayne Wilson is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 On May 2, 2022, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that he stated a cognizable 20 claim for unconstitutional conditions of confinement against Defendants Mercado and Taylor and a 21 cognizable retaliation claim against Defendant Mercado. (ECF No. 15.) However, Plaintiff was 22 advised that he failed to state any other cognizable claims. (Id.) Therefore, Plaintiff was informed 23 that he could file an amended complaint or a notice of intent to proceed on the claims found to be 24 cognizable. (Id.) 25 On May 19, 2022, Plaintiff notified the Court of his intent to proceed on the claims found to be 26 cognizable. (ECF No. 17.) Therefore, the Court will recommend that this action proceed only on 27 Plaintiff’s unconstitutional conditions of confinement claim against Defendants Mercado and Taylor 28 and retaliation claim against Defendant Mercado. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 1 || 662, 678 (2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3 2 || 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010). 3 Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 4 1. This action proceed only against on Plaintiff's claim for unconstitutional conditions c 5 confinement against Defendants Mercado and Taylor and retaliation claim against 6 Defendant Mercado; and 7 2. All other claims and Defendants be dismissed for failure to state a cognizable claim. 8 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 9 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen (14) days 10 || after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections 11 || with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 12 Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 13 || result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) 14 || (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 15 16 ||IT IS SO ORDERED. Al (re 17 || Dated: _May 20, 2022 OF 18 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28