Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02066/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02066-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MICHAEL CLARK, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS AND 

REHABILITATION, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-2066-KJM-EFB P 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil action. On September 

5, 2014, defendants CDCR, Alkire, Altamirano, Arnold, Atkinson, Beard, Cate, Davis, 

Dickinson, Harman, Hickman, Hubbard, Kavelage, Reyes, Romero, Stubbs, Tilton, Winistorfer, 

and Woodford removed this action from the Sacramento County Superior Court. Plaintiff 

subsequently filed a motion for remand, arguing that removal was improper because the 

complaint does not assert any federal claims for relief. ECF No. 9. In response, defendants filed 

a statement of non-opposition. ECF No. 11. Because plaintiff is not asserting any federal claims, 

his motion should be granted. 

///// 

///// 

///// 

Case 2:14-cv-02066-KJM-EFB Document 13 Filed 04/03/15 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

 Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be remanded to the Superior Court 

of the State of California in and for the County of Sacramento, and that the Clerk be directed to 

close this case and terminate all pending motions. 

 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 fourteen 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.” Failure to file objections 

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: April 2, 2015. 

Case 2:14-cv-02066-KJM-EFB Document 13 Filed 04/03/15 Page 2 of 2