Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01838/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01838-0/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

M.L. COFFEE,

Plaintiff, No. 2:09-cv-1838 KJN P

vs.

D.K. SISTO, et al., ORDER AND

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Pursuant to this court’s screening of plaintiff’s original complaint pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915A(a), the court found that the complaint may state cognizable claims against

defendants Rodman and Mahoney, but did not state a claim against defendants Sisto and

Cervantes. (Dkt. No. 7.) The court gave plaintiff the option of proceeding on his original

complaint or filing an amended complaint that added a cognizable claim against defendants Sisto

and Cervantes. Plaintiff chose to proceed on his original complaint against defendants Rodman

and Mahoney, effectively choosing to terminate this action against defendants Sisto and

Cervantes.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the

Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case; and

////

Case 2:09-cv-01838-MCE -KJN Document 15 Filed 06/29/10 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendants Sisto and

Cervantes 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 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 21 days

after being served with 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.” 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).

DATED: June 28, 2010

_____________________________________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

coff1838.fta

Case 2:09-cv-01838-MCE -KJN Document 15 Filed 06/29/10 Page 2 of 2