Dike

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RICHARD SCOTT KINDRED, Case No. 1:19-cv-00955-JLT (PC)

Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

TO DISMISS CLAIMS NOT FOUND

v.

COGNIZABLE

A. DIKE, 14-DAY DEADLINE Defendant. Clerk of Court to assign a District Judge 16 The Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1) and found that it states cognizable claims under the Fourteenth Amendment against A. Dike but not against B. Phi, B. Powers, or B. Price. (Doc. 6.) The Court directed Plaintiff to file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in its order or to notify the Court that he wishes to proceed only the claims found cognizable. (Id.) In response to the Court’s screening order, Plaintiff filed a notice that he “desires to proceed only on the claims found cognizable … against Defendant Dike and the Doe Defendant and to dismiss Phi, Powers, an[d] Price as Defendants.” (Doc. 7.) For this reason, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order (Doc. 6), the…