(PC) Heilman v. Vokufka et al, No. 2:2008cv02788 - Document 15 (E.D. Cal. 2009)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 12/14/2009 ORDERING 14 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS are adopted in full; and the following claims are dismissed w/out prejudice: That dft violated his right to adequate medical care; That dft violated his right to due process in the grievance system; and, that dft retaliated against him. (Matson, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Heilman v. Vokufka et al Doc. 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 THOMAS JOHN HEILMAN, Plaintiff, ORDER vs. 12 13 No. CIV S-08-2788 FCD EFB P Defendant. 11 VOKUFKA, 14 / 15 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 16 17 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 18 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262. 19 On September 21, 2009, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 20 herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections 21 to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has not filed 22 objections to the findings and recommendations. The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 23 24 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 25 ORDERED that: 26 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed September 21, 2009, are adopted in full; and 3 2. The following claims are dismissed without prejudice: 4 a. That defendant violated his right to adequate medical care; 5 b. That defendant violated his right to due process in the grievance 6 7 8 system; and, c. That defendant retaliated against him. DATED: December 14, 2009. 9 10 11 _______________________________________ FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.
