Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01220/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01220-2/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JORGE FERNANDEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

SATTERFIELD, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:19-cv-01220-JLT (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

TO DISMISS DEFENDANT

14-DAY DEADLINE

Clerk of Court to assign a District Judge

The Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1) and found that it states cognizable

retaliation claims against Eslick, Jackson, Salazar, and Satterfield, but not against Flores. (Doc. 

13.) The Court directed Plaintiff to file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies 

identified in its order or notify the Court that he wishes to proceed only the claims found 

cognizable. (Id.)

In response to the Court’s screening order, Plaintiff filed a notice that he declines to file an 

amended complaint and instead seeks to proceed on his claims against “Satterfield, Eslick, 

Jackson, and C. Salzer.”1(Doc. 14.) For this reason, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s 

screening order (Doc. 13), the Court RECOMMENDS that Flores be DISMISSED as a defendant.

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to assign a District Judge to this action.

///

 

1 Plaintiff states that he misspelled Salzer’s name as Salazar in his complaint. (See Doc. 14.)

Case 1:19-cv-01220-ADA-CDB Document 17 Filed 02/27/20 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

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

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

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

with the Court. The document should be captioned, “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)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 27, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-01220-ADA-CDB Document 17 Filed 02/27/20 Page 2 of 2