(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)

Download PDF
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

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?