(PC) Garcia v. Baniga et al, No. 1:2019cv01258 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2019)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 13 Findings and Recommendations ; ORDER for this action to proceed only against Defendant Dr. Rodriguez for inadequate Medical Care under the Eighth Amendment, and DISMISSING all other Claims and Defendants for Failure to State a Cla im; Case is Referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings, including initiation of service of process, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 11/21/2019. U. Baniga and California Correctional Health Care Services terminated. (Martin-Gill, S)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE GARCIA, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. U. BANIGA, M.D., et al., Defendants. 16 17 1:19-cv-01258-AWI-GSA-PC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (ECF No. 13.) ORDER FOR THIS ACTION TO PROCEED ONLY AGAINST DEFENDANT DR. RODRIGUEZ FOR INADEQUATE MEDICAL CARE UNDER THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT, AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 18 19 Jose Garcia (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this 20 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 21 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 22 On October 10, 2019, the court entered findings and recommendations, recommending 23 that this action proceed only against defendant Dr. Rodriguez on Plaintiff’s medical claim under 24 the Eighth Amendment, and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed from this action 25 based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 13.) Plaintiff was granted fourteen days 26 in which to file objections to the findings and recommendations. (Id.) The fourteen-day time 27 period has passed, and Plaintiff has not filed objections or any other response to the findings and 28 recommendations. 1 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this 2 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 3 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 4 Therefore, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 5 1. 6 This action now proceeds only against defendant Dr. Rodriguez for failure to provide adequate medical care under the Eighth Amendment; 7 2. All remaining claims and defendants are dismissed from this action; 8 3. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants for creating or implementing a flawed 9 policy, for retaliation, and for improperly handling Plaintiff’s prison appeals are 10 dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which 11 relief may be granted; 12 4. Defendants Dr. U. Baniga, California Correctional Health Care Services, and 13 Does #1-5 (Medical Provider Policy Makers) are dismissed from this action based 14 on Plaintiff’s failure to state any claims against them upon which relief may be 15 granted; and 16 17 5. This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings, including initiation of service of process. 18 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 21, 2019 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
