Baughman

(PC) Rodriguez v. Baughman

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 13, 20202:18-cv-00655California448 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 STEVEN GARCIA RODRIGUEZ, No. 2:18-cv-0655 MCE CKD P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DAVID BAUGHMAN, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s first amended complaint is before the court for screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court has conducted the required screening and finds that the amended complaint states a claim for use of excessive force arising under the Eighth Amendment against defendant Friend. As for the other defendants identified, the amended complaint fails to state clams upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff names 10 “Doe” defendants, but plaintiff fails to assert any allegations as to any of these defendants. As for Warden Baughman, plaintiff’s allegation that Baughman failed to protect plaintiff from Friend is vague and conclusory. In order to avoid dismissal for…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.