Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01925/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01925-5/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

PAUL C. HAMILTON,

Plaintiff,

v.

J.A. YATES, et al.,

Defendants. 

_____________________________/

1:10-cv-01925-LJO-MJS (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

FOR DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN OF

PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS 

(ECF Nos. 21 & 22)

Plaintiff Paul C. Hamilton (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a civil

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On August 31, 2011, after reviewing Plaintiff’s Complaint, the Court ordered Plaintiff

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

on his Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claim against Defendants Mattingly,

Trimble, Spearman, and Yates. (ECF No. 21.) On September 10, 2012, Plaintiff notified

the Court of his willingness to forgo an amended complaint and proceed with his

cognizable conditions of confinement claim. (ECF No. 21.)

Accordingly, all claims in Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint except for his Eighth

Amendment conditions of confinement claim against Defendants Mattingly, Trimble,

Spearman, and Yates should now be dismissed.

-1-

Case 1:10-cv-01925-LJO-MJS Document 23 Filed 10/04/12 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

The Court hereby RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment equal

protection claim be DISMISSED.

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)(1).

Within fourteen (14) 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. Y1 st,

951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 4, 2012 /s/Michael J. Seng 

ci4d6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

-2-

Case 1:10-cv-01925-LJO-MJS Document 23 Filed 10/04/12 Page 2 of 2