(PC) Edward v McDonald et al, No. 2:2010cv00979 - Document 21 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 5/10/2011 ORDERING that the 16 findings and recommendations filed February 11, 2011, are adopted infull. This action proceeds on plaintiff's Eighth Amendment medical care claim against defendants Petersen, Hogan, Martin, Arnold, Medina, and Swingle only and all other defendants and claims are dismissed with prejudice. (Duong, D)

Download PDF
(PC) Edward v McDonald et al Doc. 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MEL TYRONE EDWARD, 12 No. CIV S-10-0979-JAM-CMK-P Plaintiff, 13 vs. ORDER 14 M.D. McDONALD, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 / 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 19 Eastern District of California local rules. 20 On February 11, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations 21 herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file 22 objections within a specified time. Timely objections to the findings and recommendations have 23 been filed. 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 2 304(f), this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the 3 entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 4 proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations filed February 11, 2011, are adopted in 2. This action proceeds on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical care claim 7 8 9 10 11 full; against defendants Petersen, Hogan, Martin, Arnold, Medina, and Swingle only; and 3. All other defendants and claims are dismissed with prejudice. DATED: May 10, 2011 12 /s/ John A. Mendez UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.