(PC) Martinez v. Baughman

District Court, E.D. California·Decided May 4, 2020·No. 1:19-cv-01459·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RONALD F. MARTINEZ, Case No. 1:19-cv-01459-DAD-JLT (PC)

12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS AND STATE- 13 v. LAW CLAIM 14 D. BAUGHMAN, et al., 14-DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendants.

16 17 On April 20, 2020, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that it states 18 cognizable Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against the defendants except M. Voong 19 and L. Warren. (Doc. 18.) The Court further found that Plaintiff’s state-law claim of intentional 20 infliction of emotional distress is not cognizable. (Id.) The Court therefore directed Plaintiff to 21 file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in its order or notify the Court 22 that he wishes to proceed only on the claims found cognizable. (Id.) 23 Plaintiff has filed a notice “that he wishes to proceed only on the claims found cognizable: 24 Eighth Amendment cruel and unusual punishment claim and Fourteenth Amendment Equal 25 Protection claims … and … dismiss Voong and Warren as defendants.” (Doc. 19.) Accordingly, 26 and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order (Doc. 18), the Court RECOMMENDS 27 that: 1. Defendants Voong and Warren be DISMISSED; and, 1 2. Plaintiff’s state-law claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress (Claim III 2 of the complaint) be DISMISSED. 3 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 4 Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days of 5 the date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections 6 with the Court. The document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 7 and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver 8 of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. 9 Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11

12 Dated: May 4, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(PC) Martinez v. Baughman, (E.D. Cal. 2020).

(PC) Martinez v. Baughman ((PC) Martinez v. Baughman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related