FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PLAINTIFF TO PROCEED ONLY ON COGNIZABLE RETAILATION AND CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT CLAIM AGAINST C. DAVIS AND THAT ALL OTHER CLAIMS BE DISMISSED

(Doc. 1.)

TWENTY-ONE (21) DAY DEADLINE FINDINGS

SHEILA K. OBERTO, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff, Scott K. Ricks, is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action, which was originally filed in state court, was removed to this court by Defendant, Correctional Officer C. Davis. (Doc. 1.) A screening order issued on March 20, 2019, which found Plaintiff stated cognizable claims for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and based on his conditions of confinement in violation of the Eighth Amendment in the Complaint ("the Screening Order"). (Doc. 9.) The order allowed Plaintiff to either proceed on these claims, or to file an amended complaint if he desired to attempt to cure deficiencies identified in his pleading. (Id.) Plaintiff was given twenty-one (21) days to file an amended complaint or a notification that he desired to proceed on the claims found cognizable. (Id.) That order indicated that Plaintiff's failure to file a response would result in recommendation that he be allowed to proceed only on the claims identified as cognizable and that recommendation would issue to dismiss all other claims with prejudice. (Id.)

Although more than the allowed time has passed, Plaintiff has filed neither an amended complaint, nor a notice indicating his election to proceed only on the cognizable claims. This action should therefore proceed solely on Plaintiff's retaliation and conditions of confinement claims against Defendant C. Davis found cognizable in the Screening Order.

RECOMMENDATION

It is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that, for the reasons set forth in the March 20, 2019 Screening Order and based on the above sequence of events, Plaintiff be allowed to proceed solely on his claims for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and for being subjected to conditions of confinement in violation of the Eighth Amendment against Correctional Officer C. Davis, and that all other claims be dismissed with prejudice.

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within twenty-one (21) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. Nov. 18, 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.