Opinion
1:20-cv-00318-NE-GSA-PC
09-17-2021
DARRELL D. SMITH, Plaintiff, v. RYAN KIM, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL (Doc. No. 16.)
ORDER THAT THIS ACTION PROCEED ONLY AGAINST DEFENDANT RYAN KIM FOR PROVIDING INADEQUATE MEDICAL CARE IN VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT, AND DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS (Doc No. 1.)
Plaintiff Darrell D. Smith is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On August 16, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that this action proceed only on plaintiff's medical claims against defendant Ryan Kim, and that all remaining claims and defendants be dismissed from this action based on plaintiff's failure to state a claim. (Doc. No. 16.) The pending findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days from the date of service. (Id.) To date, no objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed with the court, and the time in which to do so has now passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a de novo review of the 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 issued by the magistrate judge on August 16, 2021, (Doc. No. 16), are adopted in full;
2. This action now proceeds only with plaintiff s medical claims against defendant Ryan Kim;
3. All remaining claims and defendants are dismissed from this action;
4. Plaintiffs medical claims against defendants Does #1, #2, and #3, and claims for attorney's fees are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiffs failure to state any claims upon which relief may be granted;
5. Plaintiff s state law claims are dismissed from the action without prejudice to filing in state court;
6. Defendants Does #1, #2, and #3 (Health Care Providers), are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiffs failure to state any claims against them upon which relief may be granted; and
7. This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings, including initiation of service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.