Mario Amador Gonzalez v. Warden Soto et al
Filing
94
ORDER Adopting 84 Findings and Recommendations, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/1/18. (Gonzalez, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MARIO AMADOR GONZALEZ,
12
13
14
15
No. 1:16-cv-01675-DAD-EPG (PC)
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
DR. SCHARFFENBERG et al.,
(Doc. No. 84)
Defendants.
16
17
18
Plaintiff Mario Gonzalez is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
19
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States
20
Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
21
On January 3, 2018, the assigned magistrate judge re-screened plaintiff’s second amended
22
complaint, recognizing that a recent Ninth Circuit opinion, Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500 (9th
23
Cir. 2017), held that 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1) requires the consent of all named plaintiffs and
24
defendants, even those not served with process, before jurisdiction may vest in a magistrate judge
25
to dispose of a civil case. (Doc. No. 84.) Concurrently, the magistrate judge issued findings and
26
recommendations recommending that defendants Edmund G. Brown Jr., Kelly Harrington, and J.
27
Beard/Scott Kernan be dismissed from this action due to plaintiffs’ failure to state a claim against
28
them. (Id. at 7.) The parties were provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and
1
1
recommendations within fourteen days. No objections were filed and the time for doing so has
2
passed.
3
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this
4
court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the
5
court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.
6
Accordingly:
7
1. The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on January 3, 2018
8
9
(Doc. No. 84) are adopted in full;
2. Defendants Edmund G. Brown Jr., Kelly Harrington, and J. Beard/Scott Kernan are
dismissed from this action for plaintiff’s failure to state a claim;
10
11
3. This action proceeds solely on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims against
12
defendants R.N. Soto and Dr. Scharffenberg for deliberate indifference to serious
13
medical needs; and
14
15
16
4. This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
February 1, 2018
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?