(PC)Anderson v. Sanborn et al, No. 2:2021cv00561 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 12/07/21 ORDERING the clerk of court randomly assign a U.S. District Judge to this action. Also, RECOMMENDING that plaintiff's claims against defendants Deters and DeJesus be dismissed without prejudice. Assigned and referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections due within 14 days.(Plummer, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC)Anderson v. Sanborn et al Doc. 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KELVIN RAY ANDERSON, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:21-cv-0561-EFB P v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS K.T. SANBORN, 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 October 18, 2021, the court informed plaintiff that he could proceed 19 with a potentially cognizable retaliation claim against defendants Sanborn and Reyes, or he could 20 file an amended complaint in an effort to also state claims against defendants Deters and De 21 Jesus. ECF No. 11. Plaintiff has elected not to amend his complaint and to proceed only with the 22 claim identified by the court. ECF No. 12. 23 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court randomly assign a United States 24 District Judge to this action. 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 Further, it is RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s claims against defendants Deters and De Jesus be dismissed without prejudice. 3 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 4 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 5 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 6 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 7 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 8 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 9 Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 10 Dated: December 7, 2021. 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.
