Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00081/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00081-6/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

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

Plaintiff Shannon Sorrells is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff declined magistrate judge jurisdiction, and this matter was 

therefore referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(1)(B) and Local 

Rule 302. 

 On February 12, 2016, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A 

and found that it failed to state any cognizable claims for relief. Plaintiff was granted leave to file an 

amended complaint within thirty days. Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on April 6, 2016. On 

July 15, 2016, the Court screened Plaintiff’s first amended complaint and found that it stated a 

cognizable claim for denial of appropriate medical care in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. 

Plaintiff was ordered to file a second amended complaint or notify the Court of his intent to proceed 

on the claim found to be cognizable. After receiving an extension of time, on September 6, 2016, 

SHANNON SORRELLS,

 Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE,

et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00081-DAD-SAB (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

RECOMMENDING THAT FIRST AMENDED 

COMPLAINT IS APPROPRIATE FOR SERVICE 

AGAINST DEFENDANTS CAPTAIN HORTON 

AND MELHOFF AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER 

CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS FROM THE 

ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A 

COGNIZABLE CLAIM FOR RELIEF

[ECF Nos. 20, 22, 30]

Case 1:16-cv-00081-DAD-SAB Document 31 Filed 09/08/16 Page 1 of 2
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

Plaintiff filed a notice of his intent to proceed only on the claim found to be cognizable. (ECF No. 

30.) 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action proceed against Defendants 

Captain Horton and Melhoff for denial of medical care in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and 

all other claims and defendants be dismissed from the action for failure to state a cognizable claim for 

relief. 

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

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within thirty (30) 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 

result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014)

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 8, 2016 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00081-DAD-SAB Document 31 Filed 09/08/16 Page 2 of 2