Foley v. Lozovoy et al

Filing 16

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Finding Service of First Amended Complaint Appropriate as to Certain Defendants, DISMISSING All Other Defendants and Claims, and REFERRING Matter Back to the Magistrate Judge for Initiation of Service of Process 11 , 13 , 14 , 15 , signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 5/15/17. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MARK D. FOLEY,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
RUSLAN LOZOVOY, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-01119-AWI-SAB (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, FINDING SERVICE OF
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT APPROPRIATE
AS TO CERTAIN DEFENDANTS, DISMISSING
ALL OTHER DEFENDANTS AND CLAIMS, AND
REFERRING MATTER BACK TO THE
MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR INITIATION OF
SERVICE OF PROCESS
[ECF Nos. 11, 13, 14, 15]

Plaintiff Mark D. Foley is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

21

636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On April 5, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and

22

Recommendations which was served on Plaintiff and contained notice that objections to the Findings

23

and Recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. The fourteen day period has expired and

24

no objections were filed.

25

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de

26

novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and

27

Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

28
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

The Findings and Recommendations, filed on April 5, 2017, are adopted in full;

3

2.

This action shall proceed on Plaintiff’s claim for deliberate indifference to a serious

4

medical need in violation of Eighth Amendment against Defendants R. Lozovoy, S. Lopez, E. Vitto,

5

E. Ramirez, H. Ducusin, C. Triesch, Mason, and Doe 1;

6
7
8
9
10

3.

All other Defendants and claims are dismissed from the action for failure to state a

cognizable claim for relief;
4.

Plaintiff’s request for declaratory judgment and transfer to Mule Creek State Prison are

dismissed; and
5.

The matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for initiation of service of process.

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13

Dated: May 15, 2017

14

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2