Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00850/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00850-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CASEY WATKINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

CHAD GREENWOOD, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:16-cv-00850-LJO-SAB

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

RECOMMENDING DISMISSING CERTAIN 

CLAIMS FROM THE ACTION FOR 

FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE 

CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(ECF Nos. 9, 10, 11)

OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN THIRTY 

DAYS

Plaintiff Casey Watkins is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On September 30, 2016, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint with leave to amend 

for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff filed a first amended 

complaint on October 14, 2016. (ECF No. 9.) On October 25, 2016, the Court screened 

Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found that it stated a cognizable claim for excessive force 

in violation of the Fourth Amendment against Defendants Chad Greenwood and Lukious Sims in 

their individual capacities. (ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff was ordered to file a second amended 

complaint or notify the Court of his intent to proceed on the claim found to be cognizable. On 

November 21, 2016, Plaintiff filed a notice of his intent to proceed only on the claim found to be 

cognizable. (ECF No. 11.) 

Case 1:16-cv-00850-LJO-SAB Document 12 Filed 11/22/16 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

The Court has found that Plaintiff has stated a cognizable claim against Defendants 

Greenwood and Sims in their individual capacities for excessive force in violation of the Fourth 

Amendment. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that all other claims be 

dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief.

This findings and recommendation will be submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within thirty (30) days

after being served with this findings and recommendation, Plaintiff may file written objections 

with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s findings 

and recommendation.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 

may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th 

Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 22, 2016 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00850-LJO-SAB Document 12 Filed 11/22/16 Page 2 of 2