CDCR
(PC) Howard v. CDCR
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KARLIS RUBEN AUGUSTUS HOWARD, No. 1:24-cv-01335-KES-SAB (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS
v. CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS CDCR, et al., Doc.
Defendants.
16 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. Plaintiff initiated this action on October 31, 2024. Doc. 1. On March 7, 2025, the Court screened plaintiff’s complaint, and found that plaintiff stated the following cognizable claims: (1) excessive force against defendants Lee, Rios, Perez, and Reyes; (2) failure to intervene claim against defendants Rios, Perez, and Reyes; (3) state law claims of assault, battery, negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violation of the Bane Act against defendants…