Jose Antonio Martinez v. Ruby Enriquez, et al.

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: October 24, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-00854
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE ANTONIO MARTINEZ, No. 1:25-cv-00854-SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE 13 v. TO THIS ACTION 14 RUBY ENRIQUEZ, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF 15 Defendants. CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS 16 (ECF No. 16) 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 19 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 On October 3, 2025, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, and found 21 that Plaintiff stated a cognizable claim for sexual harassment in violation of the Eighth 22 Amendment against Defendant Ruby Enriquez. (ECF No. 15.) The Court granted Plaintiff leave 23 to file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his intent to proceed only on the deliberate 24 indifference claim. (Id.) On October 23, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice of intent to proceed on the 25 claim found to be cognizable. (ECF No. 16.) 26 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall assign a District 27 Judge to this action. 28 1 Further, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 2 1. This action proceed only on Plaintiff's sexual harassment claim against Defendant 3 Ruby Enriquez; and 4 2. All other claims and Defendants be dismissed from the action for failure to state a 5 cognizable claim for relief. 6 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 7 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen (14) 8 days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 9 objections with the Court, limited to 15 pages, including exhibits. The document should be 10 captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiffis advised 11 that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. 12 Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 13 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. Se 16 | Dated: _ October 24, 2025 " STANLEY A. BOONE 17 United States Magistrate Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28