(PC) Cage v. Johnson

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: August 4, 2023
• Docket: 1:22-cv-01429
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JIM CAGE, Case No.: 1:22-cv-01429-CDB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO RENAME DOCKET ENTRY NUMBER 11 AND TO 13 v. RANDOMLY ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE

14 A. JOHNSON, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS AND 15 Defendants. DEFENDANTS

16 14-DAY OBJECTION PERIOD

17 18 Plaintiff Jim Cage is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 19 brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 I. RELEVANT BACKGROUND 21 On April 26, 2023, this Court issued its First Screening Order. (Doc. 10.) The Court found 22 Plaintiff stated a cognizable Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Defendant Rojas, 23 but his complaint failed to state any other cognizable claim against any other named defendant. 24 (Id. at 3-8.) As a result, within 21 days of service of the screening order, Plaintiff was to elect one 25 of the following three options: (1) to notify the Court in writing that he did not wish to file a first 26 amended complaint and was willing to proceed only on the Eighth Amendment excessive force 27 claim against Defendant Rojas with the remaining claims against any defendant to be dismissed; 1 screening order; or (3) to file a notice of voluntary dismissal. (Id. at 11-12.) 2 On May 10, 2023, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. (Doc. 11.) However, upon 3 review of the first amended complaint, it became apparent to the Court that Plaintiff has actually 4 elected to notify the Court that he wishes to proceed on the claim found cognizable by the Court 5 in its April 26, 2023 screening order. In so doing, Plaintiff used a blank amended complaint form 6 to make his notification: 7 I would not wish to file a first amended complaint and am willing to proceed only on the Eight[h] Amendment excessive force claim 8 against Defendant Rojas; the remaining claims against any other defendant to be dismissed. 9 10 (See Doc. 11 at 5 [V. Relief].) Although Plaintiff used the blank amended complaint form and the 11 Clerk of the Court docketed the document as a “First Amended Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint,” 12 it is plain from the content of the filing that Plaintiff elects to proceed only on his claim against 13 Defendant Rojas and understands his remaining claims and the other named defendants will be 14 dismissed from this action. Hence, the Court will direct the Clerk of the Court to rename Docket 15 Entry Number 11. 16 II. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 17 Accordingly, and for the reasons stated above, the Court HEREBY DIRECTS: 18 1. The Clerk of the Court to rename Docket Entry Number 11 from “First Amended 19 Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint” to “Notice to Proceed on Cognizable Claim;” and 20 2. The Clerk of the Court to randomly assign a district judge to this action. 21 Further, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s First Screening Order (Doc. 10), the 22 Court RECOMMENDS that: 23 1. This action PROCEED only on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claim 24 against Defendant J. Rojas, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983; 25 2. Defendants A. Johnson, E. Cortez, R. Rogue, A. Encinas, J. Ward and P. Actas be 26 DISMISSED; and 27 3. The remaining claims in Plaintiff’s complaint be DISMISSED. 1 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the district judge assigned to 2 | this case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within 14 days of the date of service of these 3 | Findings and Recommendations, a party may file written objections with the Court. The 4 | document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 5 | Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of 6 | rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. 7 | Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 8 | IT IS SO ORDERED. | Dated: _ August 4, 2023 | Word bo 10 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28