(PC) Stanfield v. Callaway et al, No. 1:2007cv01786 - Document 13 (E.D. Cal. 2009)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that Defendant Chand be dismissed. Motion referred to Judge Wanger, Objections to F&R due by 5/11/2009. signed by Magistrate Judge William M. Wunderlich on 4/6/09. (Gil-Garcia, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Stanfield v. Callaway et al Doc. 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 JAMES EDWARD STANFIELD, 10 CASE NO. 1:07-cv-01786-OWW-WMW PC Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11 12 v. STEVEN CALLAWAY, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 / 15 16 Plaintiff is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 17 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 30, 2009, the Court issued an order finding that 18 Plaintiff’s complaint states cognizable claims against certain Defendants, but does not state a 19 cognizable claim against Defendant Chand.. The Court ordered Plaintiff to either file an amended 20 complaint or notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on the claims found to be 21 cognizable. On February 17, 2009, Plaintiff notified the Court that he does not wish to amend and 22 is willing to proceed on the claims found cognizable. Based on Plaintiff’s notice, this Findings and 23 Recommendations now issues. See Noll v. Carlson, 809 F. 2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir. 1987) (prisoner 24 must be given notice of deficiencies and opportunity to amend prior to dismissing for failure to state 25 a claim). 26 Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Defendant Chand be dismissed. 27 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within thirty (30) 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, plaintiff may file written 2 objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 3 Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 4 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 5 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: April 6, 2009 mmkd34 /s/ William M. Wunderlich UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 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.
