Jorgenson v. Moore et al
Filing
21
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 19 & 20 , signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 8/31/2018: This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. (Hellings, J)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
PAUL JORGENSON,
Case No. 1:17-cv-00817-LJO-EPG (PC)
9
Plaintiff,
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
10
11
12
v.
(ECF NOS. 19 & 20)
THOMAS MOORE, M.D. et al.,
Defendants.
13
14
Paul Jorgenson (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
15
pauperis in this action. The matter was referred to a United States magistrate judge pursuant to
16
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
17
On July 20, 2018, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and
18
recommendations, recommending that this action proceed on Plaintiff’s Federal Tort Claims
19
Act (“FTCA”) “claim against the United States, his Eighth Amendment Bivens claim against
20
the four unknown correctional officers, and his state tort claims for medical negligence and
21
battery against Defendants Haak, Randhawa, and Emanuel Medical Center.” (ECF No. 20, p.
22
12). Judge Grosjean also recommended “that all other claims and defendants be dismissed with
23
prejudice.” (Id.).
24
Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and
25
recommendations. The deadline for filing objections has passed, and Plaintiff has not filed
26
objections or otherwise responded to the findings and recommendations.
27
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this
28
Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file,
1
1
the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper
2
analysis.
3
Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:
4
1.
5
6
The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on July 20,
2018, are ADOPTED in full;
2.
This case will proceed on Plaintiff’s FTCA claim against the United States, his
7
Eighth Amendment Bivens claim against the four unknown correctional officers,
8
and his state tort claims for medical negligence and battery against Defendants
9
Haak, Randhawa, and Emanuel Medical Center;
10
3.
All other claims and defendants are DISMISSED;
11
4.
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to reflect the dismissal of defendant Thomas
Moore, M.D., on the Court’s docket; and
12
13
5.
This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
14
15
16
17
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
August 31, 2018
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
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?