(PS) Watkins v. Greenwood, et al., No. 1:2016cv00850 - Document 12 (E.D. Cal. 2016)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending Dismissing Certain Claims From the Action for Failure to State a Cognizable Claim for Relief, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 11/22/16. Objections to F&R Due Within Thirty Days. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CASEY WATKINS, 14 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDING DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS FROM THE ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM FOR RELIEF Plaintiff, 12 13 Case No. 1:16-cv-00850-LJO-SAB v. CHAD GREENWOOD, et al., (ECF Nos. 9, 10, 11) Defendants. OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS 16 17 18 Plaintiff Casey Watkins is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 19 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 On September 30, 2016, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend 21 for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff filed a first amended 22 complaint on October 14, 2016. (ECF No. 9.) On October 25, 2016, the Court screened 23 Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found that it stated a cognizable claim for excessive force 24 in violation of the Fourth Amendment against Defendants Chad Greenwood and Lukious Sims in 25 their individual capacities. (ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff was ordered to file a second amended 26 complaint or notify the Court of his intent to proceed on the claim found to be cognizable. On 27 November 21, 2016, Plaintiff filed a notice of his intent to proceed only on the claim found to be 28 cognizable. (ECF No. 11.) 1 The Court has found that Plaintiff has stated a cognizable claim against Defendants 1 2 Greenwood and Sims in their individual capacities for excessive force in violation of the Fourth 3 Amendment. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that all other claims be 4 dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. This findings and recommendation will be submitted to the United States District Judge 5 6 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within thirty (30) days 7 after being served with this findings and recommendation, Plaintiff may file written objections 8 with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s findings 9 and recommendation.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 10 may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th 11 Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 Dated: November 22, 2016 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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.