Baughman
(PC) Martinez v. Baughman
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RONALD F. MARTINEZ, Case No. 1:19-cv-01459-DAD-JLT (PC)
Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS AND STATE-
v.
LAW CLAIM
D. BAUGHMAN, et al., 14-DAY DEADLINE Defendants.
16 On April 20, 2020, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that it states cognizable Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against the defendants except M. Voong and L. Warren. (Doc. 18.) The Court further found that Plaintiff’s state-law claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress is not cognizable. (Id.) The Court therefore 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 on the claims found cognizable. (Id.) Plaintiff has filed a notice “that he wishes to proceed only on the claims found cognizable: Eighth Amendment cruel and unusual punishment claim and Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection claims … and … dismiss Voong…