Opinion
1:13-cv-00326-LJO-EPG-PC
10-26-2015
STEVEN VLASICH, Plaintiff, v. DR. NAREDDY, et al., Defendants.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ACTION PROCEED ONLY AGAINST DEFENDANTS DR. BEREGOVSKAYA AND DR. NAREDDY ON PLAINTIFF'S EIGHTH AMENDMENT MEDICAL CLAIMS, AND THAT ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS BE DISMISSED OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE IN 20 DAYS
Steven Vlasich ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case now proceeds on the Second Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on August 18, 2014. (ECF No. 17.) The Second Amended Complaint names Dr. C. Nareddy, Dr. C. McCabe, Dr. J. Wong, Dr. O. Beregovskaya, Dr. Williams, Nurse Kayun, and Nurse B. Morean as defendants, and alleges claims for inadequate medical care under the Eighth Amendment.
The Court screened the Second Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and found that it states cognizable medical claims under § 1983 only against Dr. C. Nareddy and Dr. O. Beregovskaya. (ECF No. 18.) On September 29, 2015, Plaintiff was granted leave to either file another amended complaint or notify the court that he is willing to proceed only on the claims found cognizable by the Court. (Id.) On October 13, 2015, Plaintiff filed a notice informing the Court that he is willing to proceed only against defendants Dr. C. Nareddy and Dr. O. Beregovskaya on the cognizable Eighth Amendment medical claims. (ECF No. 20.)
Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:
1. This action proceed only against defendants Dr. C. Nareddy and Dr. O. Beregovskaya, on Plaintiff's claims for inadequate medical care under the Eighth Amendment;
2. All remaining claims and defendants be dismissed from this action; and
3. Defendants Dr. C. McCabe, Dr. J. Wong, Dr. Williams, Nurse Kayun, and Nurse B. Morean be dismissed from this action with prejudice based on Plaintiff's failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted against him.
These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty (20) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 26 , 2015
/s/_________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE