Pantoja

(PC) Blair v. Pantoja

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 8, 20241:23-cv-00574California835 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARCUS QUINN BLAIR, JR., No. 1:23-cv-00574-KES-SAB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF

13 v. DEFENDANT GAINES PURSUANT TO

RULE 4(M) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF

14 L. PANTOJA, CIVIL PROCEDURE 15 Defendant. (ECF No. 25) 16 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant 19 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 I. 21 DISCUSSION 22 This case is proceeding on Plaintiff’s excessive force claim against Defendants Pantoja, 23 Barcena, and the unidentified “Doe” officer and against Defendants Ybarra, Gentry and Gaines for 24 failure to protect in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 19) 25 On January 10, 2024, the Court ordered that the first amended complaint be electronically 26 served on Defendants. (ECF No. 20.) 27 On February 14, 2024, the California Department of Corrections and…

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.