Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00910/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00910-5/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

MICHAEL BIRD,

Plaintiff,

v.

A. ZUNIGA, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:15-cv-00910--MJS (PC)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 

CLARIFICATION

(ECF No. 24)

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 

rights action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds against 

Defendant Musleh on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim.

On May 4, 2016, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found 

that it stated a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Musleh but no 

other claims. (ECF No. 9.) Plaintiff’s seeks clarification of the Court’s screening order, 

specifically, an explanation as to why “the chain of causation was broken” with regard to 

two dismissed defendants, and “what would of kept the chain intact.”

The Court cannot provide Plaintiff legal advice or direction in crafting a cognizable 

claim. The Court has, through its screening order, provided Plaintiff with the legal 

standard applicable to his claims and the reasons those claims, as pled, were not 

Case 1:15-cv-00910-DAD-MJS Document 34 Filed 09/06/16 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

cognizable. The Court is unable to provide further clarification on this issue. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for clarification is HEREBY DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 2, 2016 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00910-DAD-MJS Document 34 Filed 09/06/16 Page 2 of 2