Satterfield

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JORGE FERNANDEZ, Case No. 1:19-cv-01220-JLT (PC)

Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

TO DISMISS DEFENDANT

v.

SATTERFIELD, et al., 14-DAY DEADLINE

Defendants. Clerk of Court to assign a District Judge 16 The Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1) and found that it states cognizable retaliation claims against Eslick, Jackson, Salazar, and Satterfield, but not against Flores. (Doc. 13.) The Court directed Plaintiff to file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified in its order or 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 declines to file an amended complaint and instead seeks to proceed on his claims against “Satterfield, Eslick, Jackson, and C. Salzer.”1 (Doc. 14.) For this reason, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening order (Doc. 13), the Court RECOMMENDS…