(PC) Bahena v. Rohrdanz et al

Filing 23

ORDER ADOPTING 16 Findings and Recommendations; ORDER DISMISSING the claims against Defendants: Palma and Teresiah; ORDERED that this case be referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge,signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/7/2021. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ESMELING L. BAHENA,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

v.
D. ROHRDANZ, et al.,

15

No. 1:20-cv-00618-NONE-SKO (PC)

(Doc. No. 16)

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Esmeling L. Bahena is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

18

in this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States

19

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20

On September 24, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge filed a screening order, finding that

21

plaintiff’s complaint states cognizable claims of deliberate indifference against Defendants

22

Rohrdanz and Manhas but not against the remaining defendants. (Doc. No. 11). The magistrate

23

judge directed plaintiff to file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies in his pleading or

24

to notify the court of his desire to proceed only on the claims found cognizable. (Id. at 1, 8.) On

25

October 29, 2020, plaintiff filed a “notice to proceed only on Defendants Rohrdanz and Manhas.”

26

(Doc. No. 14.)

27

Accordingly, on November 3, 2020, the magistrate judge issued findings and

28

recommendations, recommending that Defendants Palma and Teresiah and the claims against

1

these defendants be dismissed. (Doc. No. 16.) The findings and recommendations were served

2

on plaintiff and provided him 14 days to file objections thereto. (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff has not filed

3

any objections and the time to do so has passed.

4

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

5

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and

6

recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

7
8

Accordingly,
1.

9
10

adopted in full;
2.

11
12

The findings and recommendations issued on November 3, 2020 (Doc. No. 16) are

Defendants Palma and Teresiah, and the claims against these defendants, are
dismissed; and,

3.

This case is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings.

13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 7, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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