Edwards v. High Desert State Prison

Full title: BRIAN DARNELL EDWARDS, Plaintiff, v. HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, et al.…

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: May 5, 2011

2:10-cv-3461 WBS KJN P (E.D. Cal. May. 5, 2011)

Opinion

BRIAN DARNELL EDWARDS, Plaintiff, v. HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, et al., Defendants. No. 2:10-cv-3461 WBS KJN P United States District Court, E.D. California. May 5, 2011

          FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

          KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

         Pursuant to this court's screening of plaintiff's amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), the court found that the amended complaint states potentially cognizable claims against defendants Turner-Gambery, Cheney, Mitchell and Swingle, but did not state a claim against defendant McDonald. (Dkt. No. 14.) The court gave plaintiff the option of proceeding on his amended complaint or filing a second amended complaint that added a cognizable claim against defendant McDonald. Plaintiff chose to proceed on his amended complaint against defendants Turner-Gambery, Cheney, Mitchell and Swingle, effectively choosing to terminate this action against defendant McDonald.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendant McDonald be dismissed from this action.

         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 21 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 waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst , 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).