Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00568/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00568-0/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KAREEM J. HOWELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

J. BURNES, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:19-cv-00568-JLT (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

TO DISMISS CLAIMS NOT FOUND 

COGNIZABLE

14-DAY DEADLINE

Clerk of Court to assign a District Judge

On February 3, 2020, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1) and found that it 

states cognizable claims under the Eighth Amendment against J. Burnes, C. Gamboa, and A. 

Randolph, but not against J. Ceballos and an unnamed warden. (Doc. 10.) The Court directed

Plaintiff to file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in its order or notify 

the Court that he wishes to proceed only the claims found cognizable. (Id.)

In response to the Court’s screening order, Plaintiff filed a notice that he “would like to 

proceed ... only on the claims found to be cognizable by the court ... against Defendants Burnes, 

Gamboa, and Randolph,” and he “would like Defendants Ceballos and the warden to be 

dismissed.” (Doc. 11.) For this reason, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order 

(Doc. 10), the Court RECOMMENDS that Ceballos and the warden be DISMISSED. The Court 

DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to randomly assign a District Judge to this action.

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 

Case 1:19-cv-00568-DAD-JLT Document 13 Filed 02/24/20 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

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

the date of service of these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections 

with the Court. The document should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 

and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may result in waiver 

of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. 

Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 21, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00568-DAD-JLT Document 13 Filed 02/24/20 Page 2 of 2