Opinion
No. 2: 19-cv-1752 MCE KJN P
05-13-2020
CHARLES JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. E. HALL, et al., Defendants.
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding through counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 5, 2019, defendants removed this action from Lassen County Superior Court. (ECF No. 1.)
On April 7, 2020, the undersigned issued an order screening plaintiff's first amended complaint. (ECF No. 9.) The undersigned granted plaintiff thirty days from the date of the order to file a second amended complaint. (Id.) If plaintiff did not file a second amended complaint within thirty days, the undersigned would order defendant Hall to file a response to the potentially colorable Eighth Amendment and battery claims. (Id.) The undersigned would also recommend dismissal of those claims not found potentially colorable. (Id.)
Thirty days passed from April 7, 2020 and plaintiff did not file a second amended complaint. ////
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty days of the date of this order, defendant Hall shall file a response to the potentially colorable Eighth Amendment and battery claims in the first amended complaint; and
For the reasons stated in the April 7, 2020 order, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that all claims in the first amended complaint but for the potentially colorable Eighth Amendment and battery claims against defendant Hall be dismissed.
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." Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. 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: May 13, 2020
/s/_________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE John1752.ord