(PC) Alcaraz v. Adams

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 TEODORO SEVERIANO ALCARAZ, No. 2:24-cv-0776 TLN AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 ADAMS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 2, 2025, the court screened the complaint and found that plaintiff’s 19 deliberate indifference claims to his health and safety against defendants Casillas, Fears, and 20 Adams stated claims while his claims for deliberate indifference based on staff testing, medical 21 deliberate indifference, equal protection, or due process claims were insufficient. ECF No. 8. 22 Plaintiff was given the option of amending the complaint or proceeding immediately on his 23 cognizable claims against defendants Casillas, Fears, and Adams. Id. at 4-5. He was further 24 advised that if he failed to notify the court how he wanted to proceed, the court would assume that 25 he was choosing to proceed on the complaint as screened and recommend dismissal without 26 prejudice of plaintiff’s deliberate indifference claims based on staff testing, medical deliberate 27 indifference, equal protection, and due process. Id. at 6. The time for plaintiff to notify the court 28 as to how he wishes to proceed has now passed, and plaintiff has not made an election or 1 | otherwise responded to the order. 2 Accordingly, IT Is RECOMMENDED that for the reasons set forth in the January 2, 3 || 2025, Screening Order (ECF No. 8 at 4), plaintiff's claims of deliberate indifference based on 4 || staff testing, medical deliberate indifference, equal protection, and due process be dismissed 5 || without prejudice. 6 These findings and recommendations are 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 twenty-one days 8 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 9 || with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judges Findings 10 || and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 11 || time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 12 | (9th Cir. 1991). 13 || DATED: March 11, 2025 ~ 14 Chttien— Chane ALLISON CLAIRE Id UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28