Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01018/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01018-3/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTOPHER M. MORGAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

ANISE ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:23-CV-1018-DJC-DMC-P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s original complaint, ECF No. 1.

On February 1, 2024, the Court issued an order addressing the sufficiency of 

Plaintiff’s complaint. See ECF No. 9. The Court determined that Plaintiff states cognizable 

Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Fears and Casillas. See id. The Court also 

determined, however, that Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Adams, the Chief Medical 

Executive at the California Health Care Facility, could not proceed. See id. Plaintiff was 

provided an opportunity to amend the complaint and cautioned that, if he did not do so within the 

time provided, the action would proceed on the original complaint as against Defendants Fears 

and Casillas only and that the Court would recommend dismissal of Defendant Adams. See id. 

Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint within the time permitted therefor, and the Court 

/ / /

Case 2:23-cv-01018-DJC-DMC Document 10 Filed 03/20/24 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

now recommends dismissal of Defendant Adams consistent with the February 1, 2024, order.1

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends as follows:

1. Defendant Adams be DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which 

relief can be granted.

2. This action proceed on Plaintiff’s original complaint as to his Eighth 

Amendment claims against Defendants Fears and Casillas only. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 

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

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections 

with the Court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of objections. 

Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal. See Martinez v. 

Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: March 19, 2024

____________________________________

DENNIS M. COTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1 By separate order issued herewith, the Court directs service of process on 

Defendants Fears and Casillas. 

Case 2:23-cv-01018-DJC-DMC Document 10 Filed 03/20/24 Page 2 of 2