(PC) Gardner v. CDCR

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: January 6, 2025
• Docket: 1:24-cv-00933
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL OWEN GARDNER, No. 1:24-cv-00933-JLT-SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF 13 v. CERTAIN DEFENDANTS 14 A. MELERO, et al., (ECF No. 15)

15 Defendants.

16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 On December 5, 2024, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, and found 20 that he stated a cognizable claim for deliberate indifference to safety against Defendants Hyatt, 21 Alvardo, Geels, Guzman-Ramirez, Guillen, Torres-Rocha, D. Martinez, and Melero. (ECF No. 22 15.) However, Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim against any other named Defendants. 23 Plaintiff was granted the opportunity to file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his 24 intent to proceed on the claims found to be cognizable. (Id.) On January 2, 2025, Plaintiff filed a 25 notice of intent to proceed on the claim found to be cognizable. (ECF No. 10.) 26 /// 27 /// 28 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 2 1. This action proceed on Plaintiffs deliberate indifference claim against Defendants 3 Hyatt, Alvardo, Geels, Guzman-Ramirez, Guillen, Torres-Rocha, D. Martinez, and 4 Melero; and 5 2. All other Defendants be dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable 6 claim for relief. 7 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 8 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen (14) 9 days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 10 objections with the Court, limited to 15 pages, including exhibits. The document should be 11 captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff advised 12 that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. 13 Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 14 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. DAM Le 17 | Dated: _January 6, 2025 _ oO ES STANLEY A. BOONE 18 United States Magistrate Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28