Opinion
No. 2:16-cv-0969 MCE AC P
03-21-2018
LAFONZO R. TURNER, Plaintiff, v. N. RIAZ, et al., Defendants.
ORDER and FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In light of the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500 (9th Cir. 2017) (no magistrate judge jurisdiction based on plaintiff's consent alone), this court will vacate the undersigned's dismissal from this action of defendant J. Macomber, former Warden of California State Prison Sacramento. However, for the reasons set forth in the undersigned's April 14, 2017 screening order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, see ECF No. 12, the undersigned will recommend to the assigned district judge that defendant Macomber be dismissed without leave to amend.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the undersigned's dismissal of defendant Macomber from this action, see ECF No. 12 at 6, ¶ 4, is vacated.
Further, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendant Macomber be dismissed from this action without leave to amend, for the reasons set forth in the undersigned's April 14, 2017 screening order, see ECF No. 12 at 3-4.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a 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 waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: March 21, 2018
/s/_________
ALLISON CLAIRE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE