Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-01695/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-01695-1/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

RICHARD MICHAEL SOMERVILLE,

Plaintiff,

v.

B. BETANCOURT, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:21-cv-01695-CDB (PC) 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

TO DISMISS DEFENDANT

(Doc. 1)

FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE

Clerk of the Court to Assign District Judge

Plaintiff Richard Michael Somerville is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court screened the complaint 

and found that it states a cognizable Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim against 

Defendants Betancourt, Marquez, and Rios, Correctional Officers (“COs”) employed at Substance 

Abuse Treatment Facility (“SATF”)–Corcoran. (Doc. 12.) However, the Court found that the 

allegations did not state a claim against the Warden of SATF. (Id.) In response to the screening 

order, Plaintiff elected to proceed on complaint as screened and agrees with dismissal of the 

Warden because he has no knowledge of the Warden’s direct involvement. (Doc. 14.)

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that the Court DISMISS the Warden of SATF as a 

defendant in this case.

Case 1:21-cv-01695-CDB Document 16 Filed 08/14/23 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

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 

Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14) days from 

the date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections 

with the Court. The document should be titled, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 

Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may result in 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)). 

The Clerk of Court is directed to assign a District Judge to this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 14, 2023 ___________________ _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:21-cv-01695-CDB Document 16 Filed 08/14/23 Page 2 of 2