The opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 RANDY LAMAR BLACK, No. 2:21-cv-02167-TLN-EFB (PC)
12 Plaintiff,
13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
14 P. THOMPSON, et al.,
15 Defendants.
16
17 Plaintiff is a federal prisoner proceeding with this civil action. On November 7, 2022, the
18 court informed plaintiff that he could proceed with potentially cognizable Eighth Amendment
19 claims against defendants Allred and Birch or he could file a second amended complaint in an
20 effort to also state a claim against defendants Thompson, Alatory, Brown and Nimmo. ECF No.
21 38. Plaintiff has elected not to amend his complaint and to proceed only with the claim identified
22 by the court. ECF No. 41.
23 Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s claims against Thompson, Alatory,
24 Brown and Nimmo be dismissed without prejudice.
25 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
26 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days
27 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written
28 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned
1 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections
2 | within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.
3 || Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
4
5 | Dated: April 14, 2022. □□ PDEA
EDMUND F. BRENNAN
6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
7
8
9
10
1]
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28