(PC) Jones v. Ayon ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEREMY JONES ) Case No.: 1:21-cv-00809-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 13 v. ) RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO THIS ACTION 14 AYON, et al., ) ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 15 Defendants. ) RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS ) AND DEFENDANTS 16 ) ) (ECF No. 25) 17 ) 18 Plaintiff Jeremy Jones is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 On January 19, 2022, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found a 21 cognizable retaliation claim against only Defendant Ayon. (ECF No. 18.) However, Plaintiff fails to state 22 any other cognizable claims for relief. Therefore, Plaintiff was informed that he could file an amended 23 complaint or a notice of intent to proceed on the claims found to be cognizable. (Id.) 24 On June 3, 2022, Plaintiff timely notified the Court of his intent to proceed on the claim found 25 to be cognizable. (ECF No. 25.) Therefore, the Court will recommend that this action proceed only 26 on Plaintiff’s retaliation claim against Defendant Ayon and all other claims and Defendants be 27 dismissed from the action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Bell 28 Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 1 }| 2010). 2 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a 3 || District Judge to this action. 4 Further, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 5 1. This action proceed only on Plaintiff's retaliation claim against Defendant Ayon; and 6 2. All other claims and Defendants be dismissed for failure to state a cognizable claim. 7 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 8 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen (14) days 9 || after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections 10 || with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 11 || Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 12 || result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) 13 || (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 14 15 IS SO ORDERED. A (Fe 16 |! Dated: _ June 6, 2022 OF 17 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28