Opinion
No. 1:17-cv-01015-DAD-SAB
02-20-2018
PERRY C. BLAIR, Plaintiff, v. D. MENDIVIL, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, ALLOWING ACTION TO PROCEED ON PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM OF DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE AGAINST CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS
(Doc. No. 8)
Plaintiff Perry C. Blair ("plaintiff") is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On August 1, 2017, in Perry C. Blair v. CDCR, et.al, case number 1:14-cv-01156-LJO-SAB (PC), the court granted plaintiff's request to sever and file a new action regarding the new allegations set forth in his fourth amended complaint filed in that action. Accordingly, the Clerk of Court opened the instant prisoner civil rights action and filed plaintiff's fourth amended complaint as the operative complaint in this action. In the August 1, 2017 order, the court expressed no opinion as to the merits of the claims presented in plaintiff's complaint.
On November 22, 2017, the magistrate judge assigned to this action issued findings and recommendations recommending that plaintiff be allowed to proceed in this action on his claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need against defendants D. Mendivil and John Does 1, 2, and 3, and that all other claims and defendants be dismissed from this action. (Doc. No. 8.) The findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that objections thereto were to be filed within twenty-one days. (Id.) Plaintiff filed objections on December 13, 2017. However, plaintiff's objections do not provide a legal basis upon which to question the analysis set forth in the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations. (Doc. No. 9.)
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly,
1. The findings and recommendations dated November 22, 2017 (Doc. No. 8) are adopted in full;IT IS SO ORDERED.
2. This action shall proceed solely on plaintiff's claim of deliberate indifference to a serious medical need against defendants D. Mendivil and John Does 1, 2, and 3;
3. All other claims and defendants are dismissed from this action due to plaintiff's failure to state a cognizable claim for relief; and
4. This action is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for initiation of service of process and further proceedings.
Dated: February 20 , 2018
/s/_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE