(PC) Taylor v. Haroun ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOE ALFRED TAYLOR, Case No. 1:21-cv-01109-ADA-CDB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO 13 v. DISMISS CERTAIN DEFENDANTS AND CLAIMS 14 AYUB HAROUN, et al., (Doc. 21.) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Joe Alfred Taylor is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 18 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 20 On December 23, 2022, this Court issued its First Screening Order. (Doc. 21.) The Court 21 found Plaintiff’s first amended complaint stated cognizable claims for a violation of Plaintiff’s 22 First Amendment rights against Defendants De La Cruz and Haroun (Claims I & II) and a 23 violation of Plaintiff’s equal protection rights against Defendants De La Cruz and Haroun (Claim 24 III). However, it also found Plaintiff failed to state any other cognizable claims for relief against 25 any other Defendant. (Id. at 7-16.) Plaintiff was given 21 days to elect one of the following 26 options: (1) to file a second amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in the order; (2) 27 to notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on those claims found cognizable by the 28 Court; or (3) to file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Id. at 16-17.) 1 On January 17, 2023, Plaintiff filed notice electing to proceed on Claims I, II and II 2 | against named Defendants Haroun and De La Cruz and indicating he did not intend to file a 3 | second amended complaint. (Doc. 22.) 4 I. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 Accordingly, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order (Doc. 21), the 6 | Court RECOMMENDS that: 7 1. Defendants Kathleen Allison, Ralph Diaz, Theresa Cisneros, Stuart Sherman, and 8 Howard E. Moseley be DISMISSED; and, 9 2. The claims in Plaintiffs first amended complaint be DISMISSED, except for the 10 claims alleging a violation of Plaintiffs First Amendment rights against Defendants 11 De La Cruz and Haroun, and a violation of Plaintiffs equal protection rights against 12 Defendants De La Cruz and Haroun. 13 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 14 | Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within 14 days of the date of 15 | service of these Findings and Recommendations, a party may file written objections with the 16 | Court. The document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 17 | Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of 18 | rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. 19 | Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 20 | □□ □□ SO ORDERED. | Dated: _ January 20, 2023 | Wr bo 22 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28