Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01391/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01391-5/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL GONZALES, 1:07-cv-01391-AWI-SMS-PC

Plaintiff, ORDER VACATING FINDINGS

 AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF

vs. FEBRUARY 4, 2010

(Doc. 9.)

PRICE, et al.,

ORDER FINDING SERVICE OF

COMPLAINT APPROPRIATE AND

Defendants. FORWARDING SERVICE DOCUMENTS TO

PLAINTIFF FOR COMPLETION AND

RETURN WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

(Doc. 1)

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

 On February 4, 2010, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations to dismiss this action

for plaintiff’s failure to obey a court order requiring him to either file an amended complaint or

notify the court he is willing to proceed on the claims found cognizable by the court. (Doc. 9.) On

February 16, 2010, plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations, claiming that he

never received the findings and recommendations, and indicating he is willing to proceed on the

cognizable claims. (Doc. 10.) Good cause appearing, the court shall vacate the findings and

recommendations.

Plaintiff filed this action on September 21, 2007. On December 2, 2009, the court screened

plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and found that it states cognizable claims for

Case 1:07-cv-01391-AWI -GBC Document 11 Filed 02/18/10 Page 1 of 3
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

relief under section 1983 against defendants Price, B. S. Vikjard, M. Castro, R. Pinzon, and K.

Frescura for retaliation and for refusing to mail plaintiff’s correspondence and art, in violation of the

First Amendment. (Doc. 8.) Plaintiff was given leave to either file an amended complaint or notify

the court that he is agreeable to proceeding only with the claims found cognizable by the Court. 

(Doc. 9.) Plaintiff filed written notice to the court that he wishes to proceed only on the claims

found cognizable by the Court. (Doc. 10.) Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 1

U.S. 506, 512-15 (2002); Austin v. Terhune, 367 F.3d 1167, 1171 (9th Cir. 2004); Jackson v. Carey,

353 F.3d 750, 754 (9th Cir. 2003); Galbraith v. County of Santa Clara, 307 F.3d 1119, 1125-26 (9th

Cir. 2002). Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations of February 4, 2010 are VACATED;

2. Service is appropriate for the following defendants:

PRICE

B. S. VIKJARD

M. CASTRO

R. PINZON

K. FRESCURA 

3. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff five (5) USM-285 forms, five (5)

summonses, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction sheet and a

copy of the complaint filed September 21, 2007 (Doc. 1.).

4. Within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the

attached Notice of Submission of Documents and submit the completed Notice to the

court with the following documents:

a. Completed summons;

b. One completed USM-285 form for each defendant listed above; and 

In a Findings and Recommendations issued concurrently with this order, the court recommended that plaintiff’s

1

claims for theft of personal property, verbal harassment, forced medication, denial of showers, conspiracy, supervisory

liability, and improper inmate appeals be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under section

1983. In addition, the Findings and Recommendations recommended dismissal of defendants E. Castro, Warden Darrel

Adams, J. Munoz, and Kelley, for failure to state any claims against them upon which relief can be granted under section

1983.

Case 1:07-cv-01391-AWI -GBC Document 11 Filed 02/18/10 Page 2 of 3
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

c. Six (6) copies of the endorsed complaint filed September 21, 2007. 

5. Plaintiff need not attempt service on defendants and need not request waiver of

service. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the court will direct the

United States Marshal to serve the above-named defendants pursuant to Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 4 without payment of costs. 

6. The failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action

be dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 18, 2010 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-01391-AWI -GBC Document 11 Filed 02/18/10 Page 3 of 3