(PC) Sharpe v. Sherman, et al.

Filing 116

ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO ADD DEFENDANT, by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 11/17/2022. ( Responses due by 12/1/2022)(Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 C. CRYER, et al., 15 Case No. 1:19-cv-00711-ADA-EPG (PC) ADAM SHARPE, ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO ADD DEFENDANT (ECF No. 115) Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff Adam Sharpe is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 19 civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case proceeds on Plaintiff’s claims that 20 Defendants C. Cryer, J. Lewis, and S. Gates were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical 21 needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s “request for 22 permission to add defendant.” (ECF No. 115, p. 1) (capitalization omitted). 23 As grounds, Plaintiff states that he recently received and reviewed the transcript of 24 Defendant Lewis, who claimed to have no involvement in the review of Plaintiff’s prison appeal, 25 and instead “place[d] responsibility and culpability on a previously unknown subordinate, Cindy 26 Nules.” (Id. at 1). Plaintiff states that he was unaware of her existence until now and had no way 27 of knowing about her “as her name does not appear anywhere in the appeal response, nor any 28 document Plaintiff was provided.” (Id. at 2). 1 1 2 3 4 Upon review, the Court will require a response to Plaintiff’s request to add Nules as a defendant. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants shall file a response to Plaintiff’s request for permission to add a defendant (ECF No. 115) by no later than December 1, 2022. 5 6 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 17, 2022 /s/ 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

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?