From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Curry v. Geddes

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 4, 2020
Case No. 1:20-cv-00235-EPG (PC) (E.D. Cal. May. 4, 2020)

Opinion

Case No. 1:20-cv-00235-EPG (PC)

05-04-2020

TERRELL CURRY, Plaintiff, v. J. GEDDES, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, RECOMMENDING THAT CERTAIN CLAFMS AND DEFENDANTS BE DISMISSED (ECF NOS. 1 & 7) OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE

Terrell Curry ("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 February 14, 2020. (ECF No. 1). The Court screened Plaintiff's complaint. (ECF No. 7). The Court found that only the following claim should proceed past the screening stage: Plaintiff's claim against Defendant Geddes for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment. (Id.).

The Court allowed Plaintiff to choose between proceeding only on the claim 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 9-10). On May 1, 2020, Plaintiff notified the Court that he wants to proceed only on the claim found cognizable in the screening order. (ECF No. 8).

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the Court's screening order that was entered on April 23, 2020 (ECF No. 7), and because Plaintiff has notified the Court that he wants to proceed only on the claim found cognizable in the screening order (ECF No. 8), it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that all claims and defendants be dismissed, except for Plaintiff's claim against Defendant Geddes for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment.

These findings and recommendations will be 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: May 4 , 2020

/s/_________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Curry v. Geddes

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 4, 2020
Case No. 1:20-cv-00235-EPG (PC) (E.D. Cal. May. 4, 2020)
Case details for

Curry v. Geddes

Case Details

Full title:TERRELL CURRY, Plaintiff, v. J. GEDDES, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: May 4, 2020

Citations

Case No. 1:20-cv-00235-EPG (PC) (E.D. Cal. May. 4, 2020)