Bugarin

(PC) Parrish v. Bugarin

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 7, 20201:19-cv-00490California2,669 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KAHEAL PARRISH, Case No. 1:19-cv-00490-NONE-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

REGARDING DISMISSAL OF CERTAIN

13 v. CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

14 BUGARIN, et al., (ECF Nos. 1, 22, 25)

15 Defendants. FOURTEEN (14) DAY DEADLINE 16 17 I. Background 18 Plaintiff Kaheal Parrish (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil 19 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 On August 19, 2020, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that Plaintiff 21 stated a cognizable claim of retaliation in violation of the First Amendment against Defendants 22 Camargo and Martinez, but failed to state any other cognizable claims against any other 23 defendants. (ECF No. 22.) The Court ordered Plaintiff to either file a first amended complaint or 24 notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on the cognizable claims identified by the 25 Court. (Id.) Following an extension of time, on October 2,…

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.