(PC) Morgan v. Adams

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTOPHER M. MORGAN, No. 2:23-CV-1018-DJC-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 ANISE ADAMS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s original complaint, ECF No. 1. 19 On February 1, 2024, the Court issued an order addressing the sufficiency of 20 Plaintiff’s complaint. See ECF No. 9. The Court determined that Plaintiff states cognizable 21 Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Fears and Casillas. See id. The Court also 22 determined, however, that Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Adams, the Chief Medical 23 Executive at the California Health Care Facility, could not proceed. See id. Plaintiff was 24 provided an opportunity to amend the complaint and cautioned that, if he did not do so within the 25 time provided, the action would proceed on the original complaint as against Defendants Fears 26 and Casillas only and that the Court would recommend dismissal of Defendant Adams. See id. 27 Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint within the time permitted therefor, and the Court 28 / / / 1 || now recommends dismissal of Defendant Adams consistent with the February 1, 2024, order. ! 2 Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends as follows: 3 1. Defendant Adams be DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which 4 || relief can be granted. 5 2. This action proceed on Plaintiffs original complaint as to his Eighth 6 || Amendment claims against Defendants Fears and Casillas only. 7 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 8 | Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(I1). Within 14 days 9 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections 10 || with the Court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of objections. 11 | Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal. See Martinez v. 12 | Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 13 14 | Dated: March 19, 2024 SS GC 15 DENNIS M. COTA 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 |§$ ——— By separate order issued herewith, the Court directs service of process on 28 | Defendants Fears and Casillas.