(PC) Bumpus v. Nangalama, et al, No. 2:2012cv01102 - Document 34 (E.D. Cal. 2014)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 2/11/14 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 1/6/14 31 are ADOPTED in full; The MOTION to DISMISS filed on 7/19/14 20 on behalf of defendants Nangalama, Dillan, Sahota, Cox, Teachow and Deem is GRANTED in part as follows: Plaintiff's claims against all defendants sued in their official capacities are DISMISSED; Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claim is DISMISSED; and This action shall proceed against defendants in their individual capacities solely as to Plaintiff's claim that he was provided constitutionally inadequate medical care in violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PATRICK BUMPUS, 12 13 14 No. 2:12-cv-01102 GEB DAD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER A. NANGALAMA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 19 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On January 6, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 25 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 26 ORDERED that: 27 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 6, 2014, are adopted in full; 28 2. The motion to dismiss filed on July 19, 2014 (ECF No. 20) on behalf of defendants 1 1 Nangalama, Dillan, Sahota, Cox, Teachow and Deem is granted in part as follows: 2 3 4 a. Plaintiff's claims against all defendants sued in their official capacities are dismissed; b. Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claim is dismissed; and 5 3. This action shall proceed against defendants in their individual capacities solely as to 6 plaintiff's claim that he was provided constitutionally inadequate medical care in violation of his 7 rights under the Eighth Amendment. 8 Dated: February 11, 2014 9 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
Terms of Service