(PC) Cooper v. Heatley, et al, No. 2:2012cv00602 - Document 32 (E.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/6/13 RECOMMENDING that Defendant H. Walter Pepper's 22 motion to dismiss be granted; Defendant H. Walter Pepper be dismissed from this action; and this action shall proceed against defendants Scott Heatley and Terry Weinholdt only. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)
Download PDF
(PC) Cooper v. Heatley, et al Doc. 32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GOLDYN COOPER, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:12-cv-00602 KJM DAD P v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SCOTT HEATLEY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 17 18 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants Dr. Scott Heatley, Dr. H. Walter Pepper and Terri Weinholdt. 19 On August 15, 2013, defendant H. Walter Pepper filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint 20 for failure to state a cognizable claim against him. When plaintiff failed to file a timely 21 opposition to the motion, the court ordered plaintiff to file his opposition or statement of non- 22 opposition within thirty days. (ECF No. 28.) Following plaintiff’s September 30, 2013 request 23 for an extension of time, the court again ordered plaintiff to file his opposition. (ECF No. 30.) 24 On September 30, 2013 and October 17, 2013, plaintiff filed statements of non-opposition to 25 defendant Pepper’s motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 29 at 2 and 31.) In light of plaintiff’s statement of non-opposition to the granting of the pending motion, IT 26 27 IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 fendant H. Walter Peppe August 1 2013 mo W er’s 15, otion to dism (ECF No 22) be miss o. 1. Def gr ranted; 3 2. Def fendant H. Walter Peppe be dismiss from this action; and W er sed s d 4 3. Thi action shal proceed as to defendan Scott He is ll s nts eatley and Te Weinho only. erry oldt 5 These findings and recommend d dations are s submitted to the United States Distri Judge o ict 6 assigned to the case, pursu to the pr e uant rovisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourt f teen days 7 aft being ser fter rved with the findings and recomm ese mendations, p plaintiff may file written objections y n 8 wi the court. The docum should be captioned “Objection to Magistr Judge’s Findings ith ment d ns rate s 9 an Recomme nd endations.” Any respons to the obje A se ections shall be filed and served wit l d thin fourteen n 10 da after serv of the ob ays vice bjections. Pl laintiff is adv vised that fa ailure to file objections w within the 11 sp pecified time may waive the right to appeal the D District Cour order. M rt’s Martinez v. Y 951 Ylst, 12 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). h . 13 Da ated: Novem mber 6, 2013 3 14 15 16 17 AD:4 DA coo op602.mtdPepper 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2