Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02006/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02006-3/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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Patrick Ronald Holley,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 04-2006 MCE PAN P

vs. Findings and Recommendations

California Department

of Corrections, et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoPlaintiff is a state prisoner prosecuting this civil rights

action without counsel. 

June 3, 2005, the court dismissed plaintiff’s claims against

the California Department of Corrections and the California

Medical Facility pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, with leave to

amend. The court informed plaintiff he could proceed against

defendants Youngblood, Moreno, D. S. Jones, Davis, R. W.

Williams, M. Veal and K. Aronsen by submitting materials for 

service within 15 days, but the court would construe his election 

Case 2:04-cv-02006-MCE -EFB Document 16 Filed 06/21/05 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

so to proceed as consent to dismissal of his claims against the

California Department of Corrections and the California Medical

Facility without leave to amend. 

June 14, 2005, plaintiff submitted materials for service of

defendants Youngblood, Moreno, D. S. Jones, Davis, R. W.

Williams, M. Veal and K. Aronsen. I find plaintiff has consented

to dismissal of claims against the California Department of

Corrections and the California Medical Facility without leave to

amend. 

Accordingly, the court hereby recommends that claims against

the California Department of Corrections and the California

Medical Facility be dismissed without prejudice. 

Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l), these

findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States

District Judge assigned to this case. Written objections may be

filed within 20 days of service of these findings and

recommendations. The document should be captioned “Objections to

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The district

judge may accept, reject, or modify these findings and

recommendations in whole or in part.

Dated: June 21, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02006-MCE -EFB Document 16 Filed 06/21/05 Page 2 of 2