Sullivan v. Biter et.al.

Filing 69

ORDER ADOPTING 60 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; and ORDER for this Case to Proceed Only Against Defendants Chen, Patel and Marchiano for Deliberate Indifference to Plaintiff's Medical Needs, and Dismissing All Other Claims and Defendants signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 7/29/2016. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

MICHAEL J. SULLIVAN,

8
9
10
11

1:12-cv-01662-AWI-EPG-PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
(ECF No. 60.)

vs.

ORDER FOR THIS CASE TO
PROCEED ONLY AGAINST
DEFENDANTS CHEN, PATEL AND
MARCHIANO FOR DELIBERATE
INDIFFERENCE TO PLAINTIFF‘S
MEDICAL NEEDS, AND DISMISSING
ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND
DEFENDANTS

M. D. BITER, et al.,
Defendants.

12
13
14
15

Michael J. Sullivan (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

16

pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. The matter was referred to

17

a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

18

On February 17, 2016, the Magistrate Judge entered findings and recommendations,

19

recommending that this action proceed only against defendants Dr. Chen, Dr. Marchiano, and

20

Dr. Patel, on Plaintiff’s claims for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s medical needs, and that

21

all other claims and defendants be dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to

22

state a claim upon which relief may be granted under §1983 or the Americans with Disabilities

23

Act (ADA). (ECF No. 60.) On June 23, 2016, Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and

24

recommendations. (ECF No. 68.)

25

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this

26

Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file,

27

including Plaintiff’s objections, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be

28

supported by the record and proper analysis.
1

1

Based on the foregoing, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

2

1.

3
4

The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on February
17, 2016, are adopted in full;

2.

This case now proceeds only against defendants Dr. Chen, Dr. Marchiano, and

5

Dr. Patel, on Plaintiff’s claims for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s medical

6

needs;

7

3.

Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim;

8
9

All other claims and defendants are dismissed from this action based on

4.

Plaintiff’s due process claims, equal protection claims, claims under the ADA,

10

claims for deficient appeals process, supervisory liability claims, and claims

11

under Plata are dismissed from this action based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a

12

claim upon which relief may be granted;

13

5.

Defendants Matthew Cates, J. Clark Kelso, Y. Aguila, M. Shea, M. D. Biter,

14

Sherry Lopez, Dr. O. Ogun, Dr. M. Spaeth, R. Michael Hutchinson, J. Lewis,

15

Dr. Lozovoy, and various Jane and John Does are dismissed from this action

16

based on Plaintiff’s failure to state any claims against them;

17

6.

Chen, Patel, and Marchiano from this action on the Court’s docket; and

18
19
20

The Clerk is directed to reflect the dismissal of all defendants except defendants

7.

This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings,
including initiation of service of process.

21
22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 29, 2016
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28
2