Fraher v. Heyne et al
Filing
42
ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's Motion for Resolution of Issues 32 , signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 2/13/13. (Hellings, J)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
CECILIA FRAHER,
CASE No. 1:10-cv-0951-LJO-MJS (PC)
10
Plaintiff,
11
12
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR RESOLUTION OF ISSUES
v.
(ECF No. 32)
13 DR. S. HEYNE, et al.
14
15
Defendants.
/
16
17
Plaintiff Cecilia Fraher (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil
18 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19
Plaintiff initiated this action on May 27, 2010. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) The Court
20
screened Plaintiff’s initial Complaint and ordered Plaintiff to e file a new complaint or notify
21
22
the Court if she was willing to proceed on her cognizable claim. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff filed
23 a First Amended Complaint which the Court dismissed, with leave to amend, for failure to
24 state a claim. (ECF Nos. 9 & 10.) Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint. (Am.
25 Compl., ECF No. 13.) The Court found that Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint stated
26
a claim under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution against Defendants
27
-1-
1 Le and Mitchell for failing to provide her with adequate medical care. (ECF No. 14.) The
2
3
Court directed these Defendants be served. (ECF No. 16.) Defendants Le and Mitchell
have since fined an Answer and this matter is currently proceeding through discovery. (ECF
4
5
Nos. 25 & 28.)
On November 14, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting that the Court issue
6
7 decisions on her pending motions to amend (ECF No. 26) and for injunctive relief (ECF No.
8 27). The Court has since issued decisions on both of these motions. (ECF Nos. 36 & 37.)
9
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED.
10
11
12
13
14
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
15 ci4d6
February 13, 2013
/s/
Michael J. Seng
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?