Ricker v. California Department of Corrections Medical Department et al

Filing 17

ORDER DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants and Referring Matter Back to Magistrate Judge to Initiate Service of Process, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 10/15/2010. Defendants Moon, Wang, Dhah and Kim terminated. (Jessen, A)

(PC) Ricker v. California Department of Corrections Medical Department et al

Doc. 17

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff Phillip T. Ricker ("Plaintiff"), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, filed the complaint in this action on August 14, 2009. On January 4, 2010, the Magistrate screened the complaint and found that it states cognizable claims against Defendants Tellorbes, Anderson, Hicks, Lopez, Stringer, La Vann, Alaape and Lambert for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment, but does not state any other claims for relief under section 1983. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Plaintiff was ordered to either file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on the claim found to be cognizable. In response, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on January 15, 2010. On August 26, 2010, the Magistrate screened the amended complaint and found that it failed to state a cognizable claim. Plaintiff was ordered to file a second amended complaint or notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on the claims found cognizable in the original complaint filed August 14, 2009. On September 10, 2010, Plaintiff filed a notice that he does not wish to amend and is willing to proceed 1
Dockets.Justia.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

PHILLIP T. RICKER, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS MEDICAL DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants. /

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-01433-LJO-GBC PC ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE TO INITIATE SERVICE OF PROCESS (Docs. 1, 9, 14, 15)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

only on the Eighth Amendment claims found cognizable in the original complaint. Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. This action proceed on the complaint filed August 14, 2009, only against Defendants Tellorbes, Anderson, Hicks, Lopez, Stinger, La Vaan, Alaape, and Lambert for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment; 2. 3. 4. All remaining claims and Defendants be dismissed from this action; Defendants Moon, Kim, Dhah, and Wang be dismissed from this action; and This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge to initiate service of process proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: b9ed48 October 15, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2