Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00121/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00121-1/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TAMECUS REED,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. MIGUEL, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:20-cv-00121-JLT (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS AND CLAIM

14-DAY DEADLINE

Clerk of the Court to assign a District Judge

the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that it states cognizable retaliation

claims against Defendants Miguel and Silva, but that the due process claim and the claims against 

Defendants Beltran and Cotter, were not cognizable. (Doc. 10.) 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 on the claims found cognizable. (Id. at 7.)

Plaintiff has now filed a notice that he wishes to proceed only on the claims found 

cognizable and to “dismiss [his] due process claim and dismiss Beltran and Cotter as defendants.”

(Doc. 11.) Accordingly, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order (Doc. 10), the 

Court RECOMMENDS:

1. Defendants Beltran and Cotter be DISMISSED; and,

2. Plaintiff’s due process claim (Claim II of the complaint) be DISMISSED.

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to assign a district judge to this action.

Case 1:20-cv-00121-AWI-JLT Document 13 Filed 06/08/20 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: June 7, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00121-AWI-JLT Document 13 Filed 06/08/20 Page 2 of 2