From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Walker v. Scott

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 23, 2014
CASE NO. CV 10-5629-VAP (PJW) (C.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2014)

Opinion

CASE NO. CV 10-5629-VAP (PJW)

01-23-2014

JEFFREY E. WALKER, Plaintiff, v. DR. SCOTT, et al., Defendants


ORDER ACCEPTING FINAL REPORT AND ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the motion to dismiss, the other records on file herein, the Report and Recommendation and the Final Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have been made. The Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.

IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that Judgment be entered granting in part and denying in part the motion to dismiss, and granting Plaintiff leave to file a Third Amended Complaint.

DATED: January 23 2014.

/s/_________

VIRGINIA A. PHILLIPS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Walker v. Scott

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 23, 2014
CASE NO. CV 10-5629-VAP (PJW) (C.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2014)
Case details for

Walker v. Scott

Case Details

Full title:JEFFREY E. WALKER, Plaintiff, v. DR. SCOTT, et al., Defendants

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 23, 2014

Citations

CASE NO. CV 10-5629-VAP (PJW) (C.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2014)

Citing Cases

Woods v. Health Care Specialty Servs.

See Allsion v. Cal. Adult Auth., 419 F.2d 822, 822-23 (9th Cir. 1969) (concluding that state prison was not…

Woods v. Health Care Specialty Servs.

To the extent this Defendant is Centinela's medical department, it too is not a “person” within the meaning…