(PC) Vanderbusch v. Enenmoh et al, No. 1:2013cv01422 - Document 59 (E.D. Cal. 2017)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 57 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL and ORDER DISMISSING All Claims and Defendants Except for Plaintiff's Claim Against Defendant Chokatos for Deliberate Indifference to Serious Medical Needs in Violation of the Eighth Amendment signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 12/28/2017. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 GARY W. VANDERBUSCH, Plaintiff, 10 11 1:13-cv-01422-LJO-EPG (PC) v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DR. ENENMOH, et al., 12 (ECF Nos.16, 18, 57) Defendants. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Gary W. Vanderbusch (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action on September 5, 2013. (ECF No. 1.) The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On December 11, 2017, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and recommendations recommending that all claims and defendants, except for Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Chokatos for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment, be dismissed. (ECF No. 57). Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and recommendations within fourteen days. The fourteen-day period has expired and Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 1 1 1. The findings and recommendations issued by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 2 December 11, 2017 are ADOPTED IN FULL; and 3 2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) all claims and 4 defendants, except for Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Chokatos for deliberate 5 indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment, are 6 DISMISSED. 7 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ December 28, 2017 UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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.