Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00960/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00960-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALVARO QUEZADA,

Plaintiff,

v.

MATTHEW CATES, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:13-cv-00960-AWI-MJS

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

FOR DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN OF 

PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

(ECF No. 1)

FOURTEEN (14) DAY OBJECTION 

DEADLINE

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 

rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF Nos. 1 & 7.) No other parties 

have appeared in the action.

On March 16, 2015, the Court screened Plaintiff’s Complaint and concluded that 

Plaintiff stated cognizable First Amendment free exercise of religion, Fourteenth 

Amendment equal protection, and RLUIPA claims against Defendant Smith, but no other 

claims or Defendants. (ECF No. 10.) The Court ordered Plaintiff to either file an 

amended complaint or notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on his 

cognizable claims. On April 13, 2015, Plaintiff notified the Court of his willingness to 

forgo an amended complaint and proceed with his cognizable claims. (ECF No. 11.) 

Accordingly, all claims in Plaintiff’s Complaint except for his First Amendment free 

Case 1:13-cv-00960-AWI-MJS Document 12 Filed 04/17/15 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

exercise of religion, Fourteenth Amendment equal protection, and RLUIPA claims 

against Defendant Smith should now be dismissed. 

The Court hereby RECOMMENDS the following:

1. Plaintiff may proceed on his First Amendment free exercise of religion, 

Fourteenth Amendment equal protection, and RLUIPA claims against 

Defendant Smith; and 

2. All other claims and Defendants be DISMISSED from this action; 

These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District 

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 

fourteen (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, any 

party may file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a 

document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 

Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within 

fourteen (14) days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to 

file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. 

Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 

F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 16, 2015 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00960-AWI-MJS Document 12 Filed 04/17/15 Page 2 of 2