Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00389/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00389-2/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH BIVINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

DR. JU, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:16-cv-0389 MCE KJN P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Pursuant to this court’s screening of plaintiff’s original complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915A(a), the court found that the complaint may state cognizable claims against defendant Dr. 

Ju, but did not state a claim against defendants Sahota and Zamora. (ECF No. 9.) The court gave 

plaintiff the option of proceeding on his original complaint or filing an amended complaint that 

stated cognizable claims against defendants Sahota and Zamora. Plaintiff chose to proceed on his 

original complaint against defendant Dr. Ju, effectively choosing to terminate this action against 

defendants Sahota and Zamora.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendants Sahota and Zamora be dismissed from 

this action without prejudice.

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)(l). Within fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

Case 2:16-cv-00389-MCE-KJN Document 15 Filed 12/09/16 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

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 filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are 

advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the 

District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: December 9, 2016

bivi0389.dsm2

Case 2:16-cv-00389-MCE-KJN Document 15 Filed 12/09/16 Page 2 of 2