(PC) Williams v. Sanduval et al, No. 1:2013cv01015 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER Vacating 11 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 06/09/2014. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RANDY WILLIAMS, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. SANDUVAL, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:13-cv-01015-LJO-SAB (PC) ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS [ECF No. 11] Plaintiff Randy Williams is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 7, 2014, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and granted Plaintiff the option of either filing an amended complaint or to proceed on the claims found to be cognizable. Plaintiff failed to respond to the Court’s order within the thirty day time frame, and Findings and Recommendations to dismiss the action were issued on April 25, 2014. On April 28, 2014, the Court received a response from Plaintiff indicating that on February 19, 24 2014, he was transferred from Salinas Valley State Prison to Wasco State Prison, and he was without 25 his property for until March 12, 2014. Plaintiff did not receive the Court’s March 7, 2014, order until 26 April 16, 2014. Plaintiff also indicates he wishes to proceed on the excessive force and retaliation 27 claims against Defendant Sanduval only and dismiss all other claims and defendants from the action. 28 1 1 Based on a showing of good cause, the Court will vacate the Findings and Recommendations 2 issued April 25, 2014. In a separate order the Court will dismiss all claims and defendants, except the 3 excessive force and retaliation claims against Defendant Sanduval. 4 Accordingly, 5 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendations issued April 25, 2014, 6 are HEREBY VACATED. 7 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 9, 2014 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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.