1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JONATHAN CHRISTOPHER COFFER, No. 2:23-cv-2474 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

14 ERICSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 6, 2025, the court screened the first amended complaint and found 19 that plaintiff’s allegations against defendants Saltz, Costa, Edwards, Ericsson, and Prasad stated 20 claims while his claims against defendants Grigsby, Doe defendants, and CDCR were 21 insufficient. ECF No. 51 at 5-6. Plaintiff was given the option of amending the complaint or 22 proceeding immediately on his cognizable claims against defendants Saltz, Costa, Edwards, 23 Ericsson, and Prasad. Id. at 6. He was further advised that if he failed to notify the court how he 24 wanted to proceed, the court would assume that he was choosing to proceed on the complaint as 25 screened and recommend dismissal without prejudice of plaintiff’s claims against Grigsby, Doe 26 defendants, and CDCR. Id. at 7. The time for plaintiff to notify the court as to how he wishes to 27 proceed has now passed, and plaintiff has not made an election or otherwise responded to the 28 order. ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly 2 || assign a United States District Judge to this action. 3 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that for the reasons set forth in the February 6, 2025, 4 | Screening Order (ECF No. 51 at 5-6, 10-11), Doe defendants and defendants Grigsby and CDCR 5 || be dismissed without prejudice. 6 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 7 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within twenty-one days 8 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 9 || with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judges Findings 10 || and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 11 || time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 12 | (9th Cir. 1991). 13 | DATED: March 21, 2025 14 ~ 15 Chthwen— Clare

ALLISON CLAIRE

16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28