Fetzer v. Zangh, et al.

Filing 14

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and DISMISSING Certain Claims and Defendants 10 , signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 10/29/14: This action SHALL proceed on the Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Zangh; and The remaining claims, as well as Defendants Beard and Davis, are DISMISSED. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11

CHRISTOPHER J. FETZER,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.
DR. W. ZANGH, et al.,

15

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:14cv00357 LJO DLB PC
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING
CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS
(Document 10)

16

Plaintiff Christopher J. Fetzer (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

17
18

forma pauperis in this civil rights action. Plaintiff filed this action on March 13, 2014. The

19

matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and

20

Local Rule 302.

21
22

On September 29, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that
certain claims and Defendants be dismissed. The Findings and Recommendations were served

23

on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections to the Findings and Recommendations were
24
25

to be filed within twenty-one (21) days. Plaintiff did not file objections.1

26
27
28

1

On September 19, 2014, Plaintiff notified the Court of his willingness to proceed only on the Eighth Amendment
claim against Defendant Zangh. The United States Marshal was directed to serve Defendant Zangh on October 23,
2014.
1

1
2
3
4

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted
a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the
Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

5

1.

The Findings and Recommendations, filed September 29, 2014, are ADOPTED in

6

full;

7
8

2.

Zangh; and

9
10
11
12
13

This action SHALL proceed on the Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant

2.

The remaining claims, as well as Defendants Beard and Davis, are DISMISSED

from this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

October 29, 2014

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2