Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00875/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00875-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Lively
Defendant
Jeff Lynch
Defendant
Moirara
Defendant
Adam Randolph Powell
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADAM RANDOLPH POWELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

JEFF LYNCH, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:23-CV-0875-KJM-DMC-P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s original complaint, ECF No. 1.

On August 8, 2023, the Court issued an order addressing the sufficiency of 

Plaintiff’s complaint. See ECF No. 11. The Court determined that Plaintiff’s complaint states 

cognizable Eighth Amendment safety claims against Defendants Moirara and Lively arising from 

a January 22, 2022, incident at the California Medical Facility. See id. The Court also 

determined that Plaintiff’s claims against the prison warden, Defendant Lynch, are insufficient. 

See id. Plaintiff was provided leave to amend and cautioned that, if no amended complaint was 

filed within the 30-day time period provided therefor, the action would proceed on Plaintiff’s 

safety claims against Defendants Moirara and Lively and that the Court would recommend 

dismissal of Defendant Lynch. See id. As of November 2, 2023, Plaintiff had not filed an 

amended complaint and the Court directed service on Defendants Moirara and Lively consistent 

Case 2:23-cv-00875-DC-DMC Document 17 Filed 01/12/24 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

with the August 8, 2023, order. See ECF No. 12. The Court now recommends dismissal of 

Defendant Lynch. 

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends as follows:

1. This action proceed on Plaintiff’s complaint, ECF No. 1, as to Plaintiff’s 

Eighth Amendment safety claim against Defendants Moirara and Lively.

2. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Lynch be DISMISSED for failure to 

state a claim.

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 14 days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections 

with the Court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of objections. 

Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal. See Martinez v. 

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

Dated: January 11, 2024

____________________________________

DENNIS M. COTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:23-cv-00875-DC-DMC Document 17 Filed 01/12/24 Page 2 of 2