Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01690/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01690-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Barajas
Defendant
Vance Edward Johnson
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

VANCE EDWARD JOHNSON,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

BARAJAS, et al.,

 Defendant.

1:14-cv-01690-LJO-GSA-PC

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,

RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ACTION

PROCEED ONLY AGAINST DEFENDANT

BARAJAS ON PLAINTIFF’S EIGHTH 

AMENDMENT CONDITIONS OF 

CONFINEMENT CLAIM, AND THAT ALL 

OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS BE 

DISMISSED

OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE IN 20 DAYS

Vance Edward Johnson (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. The case now proceeds on 

the First Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on August 21, 2015. (ECF No. 9.) The First

Amended Complaint names sole defendant Correctional Officer M. Barajas and alleges claims 

for adverse conditions of confinement under the Eighth Amendment and equal protection 

violations under the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Court screened Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

' 1915A and found that it states a cognizable Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement 

claim against defendant Barajas, but no other claims. (ECF No. 11.) On June 24, 2016, 

Plaintiff was granted leave to either file a Second Amended Complaint or notify the Court that 

he is willing to proceed only on the claim found cognizable by the Court. (Id.) On September 

Case 1:14-cv-01690-LJO-GSA Document 19 Filed 09/21/16 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

19, 2016, Plaintiff filed a notice informing the Court that he is willing to proceed only on the 

cognizable Eighth Amendment claim against defendant Barajas. (ECF No. 18.)

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

1. This action proceed only against defendant Barajas, on Plaintiff’s Eighth 

Amendment claim for adverse conditions of confinement;

2. All remaining claims and defendants be dismissed from this action; and

3. Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim be dismissed from this 

action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim.

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

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

twenty (20) 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 21, 2016 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01690-LJO-GSA Document 19 Filed 09/21/16 Page 2 of 2