Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01256/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01256-4/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM J. BLUE, III,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1256 GEB PAN P

vs.

N. GRANNIS, et al.,

Defendants.

 / FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff is a state prisoner prosecuting this civil rights action without counsel. 

On February 1, 2006, the court dismissed plaintiff’s claims against defendants

Carey, Cervantes, and Grannis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, with leave to amend. The court

informed plaintiff he could proceed against defendant Scavetta by submitting materials for

service within 15 days, but the court would construe his election so to proceed as consent to

dismissal of his claims against defendants Carey, Cervantes, and Grannis without leave to

amend. 

On February 9, 2006, plaintiff submitted materials for service of defendant

Scavetta. The court finds that plaintiff has consented to dismissal of claims against defendants

Carey, Cervantes, and Grannis. 

/////

Case 2:05-cv-01256-GEB-EFB Document 16 Filed 02/27/06 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s claims against

defendants Carey, Cervantes, and Grannis be dismissed. 

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 twenty

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

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that

failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: February 27, 2006.

7

blue1256.fr some ds

Case 2:05-cv-01256-GEB-EFB Document 16 Filed 02/27/06 Page 2 of 2