From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

King v. Villegas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 8, 2018
Case No. 1:17-cv-00676-AWI-EPG (PC) (E.D. Cal. Feb. 8, 2018)

Opinion

Case No. 1:17-cv-00676-AWI-EPG (PC)

02-08-2018

JERRY LEE KING, Plaintiff, v. R. VILLEGAS, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, RECOMMENDING THAT ALL CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS BE DISMISSED, EXCEPT FOR PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS FOR EXCESSIVE FORCE IN VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT AGAINST DEFENDANTS R. VILLEGAS AND P. CRUZ (ECF NOS. 1 & 10) OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS

On May 17, 2017, Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action. (ECF No. 1). The Court screened Plaintiff's complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF No. 10). The Court found that the complaint stated cognizable claims for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against defendants R. Villegas and P. Cruz. (Id. at 8). 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 for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against defendants R. Villegas and P. Cruz, 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). On January 31, 2018, Plaintiff notified the Court that he is willing to proceed only on the claims for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against defendants R. Villegas and P. Cruz. (ECF No. 11).

Accordingly, for the reasons laid out in the Court's screening order that was entered on January 8, 2018 (ECF No. 10), and because Plaintiff has notified the Court that he is willing to proceed only on the claims for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against defendants R. Villegas and P. Cruz (ECF No. 11), it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that all claims and defendants be dismissed with prejudice, except for Plaintiff's claims for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against defendants R. Villegas and P. Cruz.

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)). IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 8 , 2018

/s/ _________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

King v. Villegas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 8, 2018
Case No. 1:17-cv-00676-AWI-EPG (PC) (E.D. Cal. Feb. 8, 2018)
Case details for

King v. Villegas

Case Details

Full title:JERRY LEE KING, Plaintiff, v. R. VILLEGAS, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Feb 8, 2018

Citations

Case No. 1:17-cv-00676-AWI-EPG (PC) (E.D. Cal. Feb. 8, 2018)