Jacobsen v. Curran et al

Filing 70

ORDER DENYING 67 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 3/31/2018. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
MICHAEL NEIL JACOBSEN,
11
Plaintiff,

12
v.

13
14

OFFICER CURRAN, et al.,

CASE NO. 1:16-cv-01050-LJO-MJS (PC)
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO DISMISS
(ECF No. 67)

Defendants.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Plaintiff is a former county inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this
civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action proceeds on
Plaintiff’s first amended complaint against Defendants Curran and Gonzalez for
inadequate medical care in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the United States
Constitution. (ECF No. 11.)

23
24
25

On March 14, 2018, Plaintiff filed a proposed amended complaint. (ECF No. 66.)
On March 19, 2018, the Court denied Plaintiff leave to substantively amend as
amendment was deemed futile.1 (ECF No. 68.)

26
27
28

1

The Court did allow Plaintiff to substitute newly identified defendants for those previously referred to in
the first amended complaint as Does. (See ECF No. 68.)

1

On March 19, 208, Defendants moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s proposed amended

2

complaint. (ECF No. 67.) Inasmuch as the Court had that same day denied Plaintiff

3

leave to proceed on the proposed amended complaint,

4

Defendant’s motion is DENIED as moot.

5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 31, 2018

/s/

8

Michael J. Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2