(PC) Washington v. Uddin et al, No. 2:2022cv02272 - Document 22 (E.D. Cal. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/21/23 ADOPTING in full 13 Findings and Recommendations and this action proceeds on Plaintiff's original complaint as to his Eighth Amendment medical care claim against defendant Uddin. Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force claim is DISMISSED. Lynch is DISMISSED as a defendant to this action. The matter is REFERRED back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further pretrial proceedings. (Kastilahn, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Washington v. Uddin et al Doc. 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HOWARD WASHINGTON, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:22-cv-02272-KJM-DMC-P v. ORDER MESKATH UDDIN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action under 17 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 19 Eastern District of California local rules. On April 5, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, 20 21 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections 22 within the time specified therein. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been 23 filed. The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 24 25 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 26 reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) 27 (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 and [the appellate] court . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and 2 recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed April 5, 2023, are adopted in full. 5 2. This action proceeds on plaintiff’s original complaint as to his Eighth 6 Amendment medical care claim against defendant Uddin. 7 3. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claim is dismissed. 8 4. Lynch is dismissed as a defendant to this action. 9 5. The matter is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further 10 pretrial proceedings. 11 DATED: July 21, 2023. 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
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
