(PC) Jordan v. Norris, et al.

Filing 64

ORDER ADOPTING 63 Findings and Recommendations and DENYING Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 52 signed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 8/2/2022. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LAMAR JORDAN,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.

No. 1:20-cv-0467 JLT EPG (PC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT

E. ANUNCIACION, et al.,
(Docs. 52, 63)

15

Defendants.

16
17

The plaintiff asserts he suffered violations of his Eighth Amendment rights while

18

incarcerated. He contends Napoles and Anunciacion, both of whom are dentists, were

19

deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs related to post-operative dental care. (See

20

Doc. 1.)

21

Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 52.) The assigned magistrate

22

judge found there were “genuine disputes of material fact regarding whether Defendants

23

knowingly disregarded Plaintiff’s serious medical needs.” (Doc. 63 at 2, 19.) Therefore, the

24

magistrate judge recommended the motion for summary judgment be denied. (Id.)

25

The Court granted the parties 21 days to file any objections to the Findings and

26

Recommendations. (Doc. 63 at 19.) In addition, the Court advised them “that failure to file

27

objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id., citing

28

Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014), Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391,
1

1
2

1394 (9th Cir. 1991).) The deadline to file objections has passed and no objections were filed.
According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case.

3

Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes the magistrate judge’s Findings

4

and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Thus, the Court

5

ORDERS:

6

1.

7
8

The Findings and Recommendations issued on June 28, 2022 (Doc. 63), are
ADOPTED in full.

2.

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 52) is DENIED.

9
10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 2, 2022

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