-JLT (PC) Bakhtiari v. Yates et al, No. 1:2011cv00102 - Document 9 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that 1 Certain Claims and Defendants be Dismissed signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 01/28/2011. Referred to Judge Ishii; Objections to F&R due by 2/14/2011.(Flores, E)

Download PDF
-JLT (PC) Bakhtiari v. Yates et al Doc. 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MORTEZA BAKHTIARI, 12 Case No. 1:11-cv-00102 AWI JLT (PC) Plaintiff, 13 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING THAT CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS BE DISMISSED v. 14 JAMES A. YATES, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 / 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 18 Plaintiff is represented by counsel. On January 24, 2011, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and 19 found that it states the following cognizable claims: (1) excessive force under the Eighth Amendment 20 against Defendants Widlund, Gonzales, Gallegos, and Lopez; (2) inadequate medical care (prescription 21 medication) under the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Widlund and Hernandez; (3) inadequate 22 medical care (post-altercation treatment) under the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Widlund, 23 Lopez, Gonzales, Gallegos, and Hernandez; and (4) retaliation under the First Amendment against 24 Defendant Gonzales. (Doc. 7.) The Court ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint or notify the 25 Court of his willingness to proceed on the claims found cognizable by the Court in its screening order. 26 (Id.) On January 27, 2011, Plaintiff filed written notice with the Court, stating that he wished to proceed 27 only on those claims found cognizable by the Court. (Doc. 8.) 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 2 1. 3 4 regarding the denial of prescription medication be DISMISSED; 2. 5 6 Plaintiff’s inadequate medical care claims against Defendants Gonzales and Gallegos Plaintiff’s equal protection claims against Defendants Widlund, Gonzales, Gallegos, Lopez, and Hernandez be DISMISSED; 3. 7 Plaintiff’s conspiracy claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 and 1986 against Defendants Widlund, Gonzales, Gallegos, and Lopez be DISMISSED; 8 4. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Yates, Fogal, and Shannon be DISMISSED; and 9 5. This action be allowed to proceed on the following claims: (1) excessive force under the 10 Eighth Amendment against Defendants Widlund, Gonzales, Gallegos, and Lopez; (2) 11 inadequate medical care (prescription medication) under the Eighth Amendment against 12 Defendants Widlund and Hernandez; (3) inadequate medical care (post-altercation 13 treatment) under the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Widlund, Lopez, Gonzales, 14 Gallegos, and Hernandez; and (4) retaliation under the First Amendment against 15 Defendant Gonzales.1 16 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned 17 to the case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Within ten days after being served 18 with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the court. Such a 19 document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” 20 Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal 21 the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 22 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 Dated: January 28, 2011 9j7khi /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 27 1 28 The Court will instruct the Clerk of the Court to issue summons for Defendants upon adoption of these findings and recommendations by the assigned district judge. 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.