Opinion
Case No. 1:17-cv-00840-EPG (PC)
06-20-2018
CARLTON R. CALLINS, Plaintiff, v. M. D. STAINER, et al., Defendants.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, RECOMMENDING THAT ALL CLAFMS AND DEFENDANTS BE DISMISSED, EXCEPT FOR PLAINTIFF'S CLAFMS AGAINST DEFENDANT C. KYT FOR VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT FOR SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND/OR ASSAULT; AGAINST DEFENDANTS GARRISON, ZAMORA, MANSON, PFEIFFER, AND DUNCAN FOR FAILURE TO PROTECT IN VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT; AND AGAINST DEFENDANTS J. CERVANTES, J. GUZMAN, J. PENA, J. LOPEZ, I. PADILLA, AND J. ESCUTIA FOR EXCESSIVE FORCE IN VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT (ECF NOS. 1 & 18) OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE
Carlton Callins ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action on June 23, 2017. (ECF No. 1). The Court screened Plaintiff's complaint. (ECF No. 18). The Court found that Plaintiff stated "cognizable claims against Defendant C. Kyt for violation of the Eighth amendment for sexual harassment and/or assault; against Defendants Garrison, Zamora, Manson, Pfeiffer, and Duncan for failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against Defendants J. Cervantes, J. Guzman, J. Pena, J. Lopez, I. Padilla, and J. Escutia for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment." (Id. at 10). The Court also found that Plaintiff failed to state any other cognizable claims. (Id).
The Court allowed Plaintiff to choose between proceeding only on the claims found cognizable by the Court in the screening order, amending the complaint, or standing on the complaint subject to the Court issuing findings and recommendations to a district judge consistent with the screening order. (Id. at 12). On June 18, 2018, Plaintiff notified the Court that he is willing to proceed only on the claims found cognizable in the screening order. (ECF No. 19).
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the Court's screening order that was entered on May 21, 2018 (ECF No. 18), and because Plaintiff has notified the Court that he is willing to proceed only on the claims found cognizable by the Court (ECF No. 19), it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that all claims and defendants be dismissed, except for Plaintiff's claims against Defendant C. Kyt for violation of the Eighth amendment for sexual harassment and/or assault; against Defendants Garrison, Zamora, Manson, Pfeiffer, and Duncan for failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against Defendants J. Cervantes, J. Guzman, J. Pena, J. Lopez, I. Padilla, and J. Escutia for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States district judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen (14) days after being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).
Additionally, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 20 , 2018
/s/_________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE