Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-02007/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-02007-1/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 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOHN A. MAGANA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CSP SOLANO CDCR, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:23-cv-2007 AC P 

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. On October 31, 2024, the court screened the complaint and found that plaintiff 

had not stated any claims for relief except for an Eighth Amendment claim against defendant 

Cortez for failing to provide pain medication. ECF No. 8. Plaintiff was given the option of 

amending the complaint or proceeding immediately on his cognizable claim against defendant 

Cortez. Id. at 4. He was further advised that if he failed to notify the court how he wanted to 

proceed, the court would assume that he was choosing to proceed on the complaint as screened. 

Id. The time for plaintiff to notify the court as to how he wishes to proceed has now passed, and 

plaintiff has not made an election or otherwise responded to the order. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly 

assign a United States District Judge to this action. 

IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that for the reasons set forth in the October 31, 2024 

Screening Order (ECF No. 8 at 3), all claims and defendants be dismissed without prejudice 

Case 2:23-cv-02007-DJC-AC Document 9 Filed 12/05/24 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 

except for plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against defendant Cortez for failing to provide 

pain medication. 

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 twenty-one days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 

with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judges Findings 

and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is 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 4, 2024 

Case 2:23-cv-02007-DJC-AC Document 9 Filed 12/05/24 Page 2 of 2