(PC) Williams v. Garza et al, No. 1:2006cv01569 - Document 23 (E.D. Cal. 2009)
Court Description: FINDINGS And RECOMMENDATIONS 19 , signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 10/21/2009. It is RECOMMENDED that Defendants Trimble, Myers, and Fresno County Sheriff's Investigative Division, be dismissed. It is Further RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's claims regarding medical care and failure to report be dismissed. F&R referred to Judge Anthony W. Ishii; Objections to F&R due by 11/24/2009. (Scrivner, E)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Williams v. Garza et al Doc. 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 LUMPKIN WILLIAMS, 10 11 NO. 1:06-cv-01569 AWI YNP GSA (PC) Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. GARZA, et al., 12 13 Defendants. 14 / 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 17 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 22, 2009, the Court issued an order finding that 18 Plaintiff’s second amended complaint states cognizable claims against certain defendants, but does 19 not state a cognizable against Defendants Trimble, Myers and Fresno County Sheriff’s Investigative 20 Division. Plaintiff also failed to state a claim on his allegations regarding medical care and failure 21 to report. The Court ordered Plaintiff to either file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his 22 willingness to proceed only on the claims found to be cognizable. On October 13, 2009, Plaintiff 23 notified the Court that he does not wish to amend and is willing to proceed on the claims found 24 cognizable. Based on Plaintiff’s notice, this Findings and Recommendations now issues. See Noll 25 v. Carlson, 809 F. 2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir. 1987) (prisoner must be given notice of deficiencies and 26 opportunity to amend prior to dismissing for failure to state a claim). 27 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Defendants Trimble, Myers, and 28 Fresno County Sheriff’s Investigative Divsion, be dismissed. IT IS FURTHER 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s claims regarding medical care and failure to report be 2 dismissed. 3 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 4 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within thirty (30) 5 days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, plaintiff may file written 6 objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 7 Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 8 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 9 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 10 11 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 6i0kij October 21, 2009 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
