(PC) Cloud v. Cox
Opinion
JOEL JAMES CLOUD, No. 2:19-cv-2593 WBS DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS COX, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Before the court is defendants request for clarification of the status of defendants Cox and Rodriguez. This court finds that it made an error in the findings and recommendations issued April 15, 2020. (ECF No. 14.) This court recommended dismissal of defendant Cox rather than of defendant Rodriguez. Defendant Cox has been served and has appeared in this case, so he has not been prejudiced by the error. To clarify the docket, this court will vacate its prior recommendation that Cox be dismissed and recommend the dismissal of defendant Rodriguez. In addition, the Clerk will be directed to correct the name of the second defendant remaining in this case to Von Rader. For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. This court’s recommendation that defendant Cox be dismissed from this action is vacated; 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to change to docket to reflect the correct spelling of defendant Von Rader’s name.! Further, IT IS RECOMMENDED that 1. Defendant Cox be re-instated as a defendant in this case; and 2. Defendant Rodriguez be dismissed. These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, either party may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver of the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated: November 2, 2020 ORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DLB» DLB1/prisoner-civil rights/clou2593.def clarif || | The name currently appears as “Van Raiden” on the docket.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
(PC) Cloud v. Cox ((PC) Cloud v. Cox) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.