Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-01336/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-01336-2/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 

JOSHUA SALAZAR, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BROWN, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:19-cv-1336-EFB P 

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in an action brought 

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 11, 2020, the court determined that plaintiff’s complaint 

had alleged, for screening purposes, a viable Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim 

against defendants Grant and Singh, but had not alleged any viable claims against defendant 

Brown. ECF No. 5. The court informed plaintiff he could proceed with the claim against 

defendants Grant and Singh or file an amended complaint within 30 days. Id. Plaintiff has 

elected to proceed only with the claim against defendants Grant and Singh. See ECF No. 8. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to randomly assign a United States 

District Judge to this case. 

///// 

///// 

Case 2:19-cv-01336-TLN-JDP Document 10 Filed 03/10/20 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 

Further, it is RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s claims against defendant Brown be 

dismissed 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 

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.” Failure to file objections 

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: March 10, 2020. 

Case 2:19-cv-01336-TLN-JDP Document 10 Filed 03/10/20 Page 2 of 2