(PC) Perkins v. Hartwick et al, No. 2:2018cv03156 - Document 15 (E.D. Cal. 2020)

Court Description: ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 4/2/2020 ORDERING the Clerk to randomly assign a US District Judge to this case and RECOMMENDING plaintiff's claims against defendants J. Smith, E. Meraz, A. Me ndoza, A. D'Andrade, S. Proffer, C. Thompson, D. Valle, J. Carrillo, D. Contreras, B. Graham, S. Meadows, P. Denmark, S. Shaver, and S. Prince, be dismissed without prejudice. Assigned and referred to Judge John A. Mendez; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
(PC) Perkins v. Hartwick et al Doc. 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LONNIE DONNELL PERKINS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:18-cv-3156-EFB P v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS F. HARTWICK, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in an action brought 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 10, 2020, the court determined that plaintiff’s complaint had 19 alleged, for screening purposes, a viable Eighth Amendment claim against defendant Hartwick, 20 but had not alleged any viable claims against any other defendant. ECF No. 11. The court 21 informed plaintiff he could proceed with the claim against defendant Hartwick or file an amended 22 complaint within 30 days. Id. Plaintiff has elected to proceed only with the claim against 23 defendant Hartwick. See ECF No. 14. 24 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly assign a United 25 States District Judge to this case. 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Further, IT IS RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s claims against defendants J. Smith, E. 2 Meraz, A. Mendoza, A. D’Andrade, S. Proffer, C. Thompson, D. Valle, J. Carrillo, D. Contreras, 3 B. Graham, S. Meadows, P. Denmark, S. Shaver, and S. Prince, be dismissed without prejudice. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 6 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 7 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 8 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 9 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 10 Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 11 Dated: April 2, 2020. 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.