Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01248/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01248-2/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

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

KEVIN T. FLEMINGS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

C. GRAY, et al., 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:14-cv-01248 LJO DLB PC

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF 

WILLINGNESS TO PROCEED ON 

COGNIZABLE CLAIMS

[ECF No. 10]

Plaintiff Kevin T. Flemings (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 

forma pauperis in this civil rights action. Plaintiff filed this action on August 8, 2014.

On July 17, 2015, the Court screened Plaintiff’s Complaint and found that it stated the 

following claims: (1) violation of Plaintiff’s procedural due process rights by Defendants Gray, 

Timmons, and White; and (2) violation of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and 

unusual punishment against Defendants Gray, Timmons, and White. The Court ordered Plaintiff 

to file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on these

claims.

On July 27, 2015, Plaintiff notified the Court that he wanted to proceed only on the 

cognizable claims identified above. 

///

Case 1:14-cv-01248-LJO-DLB Document 11 Filed 08/04/15 Page 1 of 2
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

RECOMMENDATION

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS the following:

1. This action be ORDERED to proceed on the following claims: (1) violation of 

Plaintiff’s procedural due process rights by Defendants Gray, Timmons, and White; and (2) 

violation of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment against 

Defendants Gray, Timmons, and White; and

2. The remaining claims, as well as Defendant F. Feliciano, be DISMISSED from this 

action.

These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

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

(14) days after date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 

objections with the Court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 

Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is 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).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 3, 2015 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01248-LJO-DLB Document 11 Filed 08/04/15 Page 2 of 2