(PC) Embrey v. McComas et al

Filing 13

ORDER ADOPTING 12 Findings and Recommendations and DISMISSING Non-Cognizable Claims signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/19/2020.(Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JORDAN LEE EMBREY, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 1:20-cv-00650-DAD-BAM (PC) v. MCCOMAS, et al., 15 Defendants. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING NON-COGNIZABLE CLAIMS (Doc. No. 12) 16 17 Plaintiff Jordan Lee Embrey is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action 18 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 20 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On September 25, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 21 22 recommendations, recommending that this action proceed on plaintiff’s first amended complaint 23 on plaintiff’s medical deliberate indifference claim against defendants Dr. Obendena and 24 Williams. (Doc. No. 12.) The magistrate judge further recommended that all other federal claims 25 and all other defendants be dismissed from this action based on plaintiff’s failure to state claims 26 upon which relief may be granted. (Id.) The findings and recommendations were served on 27 plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) 28 ///// 1 1 days from the date of service. (Id.) To date, no objections to the findings and recommendations 2 have been filed with the court, and the time in which to do so has now passed. 3 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 4 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings 5 and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 6 Accordingly: 7 1. The findings and recommendations issued on September 25, 2020 (Doc. No. 12) are 8 adopted in full; 9 2. This action proceeds on plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed September 1, 2020 10 (Doc. No. 10), against defendants Obendena and Williams for deliberate indifference 11 to plaintiff’s serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment; 12 3. All other federal claims and all other defendants are dismissed from this action due to 13 14 plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; and 4. This action is referred back to the magistrate judge for proceedings consistent with this 15 16 17 18 order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 19, 2020 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?