(PC) DeVon v. Diaz et al, No. 1:2007cv01727 - Document 33 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER Adopting 32 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER for this Action to Proceed on the 31 Fifth Amended Complaint Against Defendants Atkins and Carlson, on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment Medical Claim, and DISMISSING all other Claims and Defendants for Failure to State a Claim; ORDER REFERRING Case back to Magistrate Judge for further Proceedings signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 6/30/2011. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
(PC) DeVon v. Diaz et al Doc. 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALAN DeVON, 12 13 14 Plaintiff, vs. DIAZ, et al., 16 17 Defendants. ORDER REFERRING CASE BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS 19 20 21 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 32.) ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO PROCEED ON THE FIFTH AMENDED COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANTS ATKINS AND CARLSON, ON PLAINTIFF’S EIGHTH AMENDMENT MEDICAL CLAIM, AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 15 18 1:07-cv-01727-AWI-GSA-PC _____________________________/ Alan DeVon (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights 22 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 23 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 24 On April 29, 2011, findings and recommendations were entered, recommending that 25 this action proceed with the Fifth Amended Complaint filed on April 25, 2011, on Plaintiff’s Eighth 26 Amendment medical claim found cognizable by the Court against defendants Atkins and Carlson, 27 and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed for failure to state a claim. (Doc. 32.) 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations within 2 thirty days. To date, plaintiff has not filed objections or otherwise responded to the findings and 3 recommendations. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ' 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, 4 5 this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 6 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 7 Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 8 1. 9 The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on April 29, 2011, are ADOPTED in full; 10 2. This action now PROCEEDS with the Fifth Amended Complaint filed on 11 April 25, 2011, on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical claim found 12 cognizable by the Court against defendants Atkins and Carlson; 13 3. 14 All remaining claims and defendants are DISMISSED, based on Plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under § 1983; 15 4. Plaintiff's claims, if any, for supervisory liability are DISMISSED from this 16 action, based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which relief may be 17 granted under § 1983; 18 5. Defendants Fouch, Davis, and Prudhomme are DISMISSED from this action 19 based on Plaintiff's failure to state any claims upon which relief may be 20 granted against them under § 1983; 21 6. 22 The Clerk is DIRECTED to: (1) 23 Reflect on the docket the dismissal of defendants Fouch, Davis, Prudhomme, Beeler, and Perez from this action, and 24 (2) 25 Add defendants Lieutenant T. Atkins and Nurse Carlson to the docket; and 26 /// 27 /// 28 2 1 7 2 3 This action is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings, including initiation of service. IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated: 0m8i78 June 30, 2011 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.