Cates
Roderick Lynn Wade v. B. Gates, et al.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RODERICK LYNN WADE, No. 1:22-cv-00123-KES-SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF
13 v. CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS 14 B. GATES, et al., (ECF Nos. 25, 27)
15 Defendants.
16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action. 18 I. 19 BACKGROUND 20 On June 13, 2025, Plaintiff’s complaint was screened. (ECF No. 21.) The screening order 21 found that the complaint only stated claims against Defendants Nege and Montegrande for Eighth 22 Amendment deliberate indifference. Id. at 21. As a result, Plaintiff was given the options of 23 moving forward with the complaint as screened; of filing an amended complaint; of filing a notice 24 of his intent to stand on the complaint, or of voluntarily dismissing this matter in its entirety. Id. 25 at 21-22. Plaintiff was given thirty days to take one of…