(PC) Serrano v. Rudas et al

Filing 19

ORDER ADOPTING 17 Findings and Recommendations to Dismiss Certain Claims and Defendants signed by District Judge Kirk E. Sherriff on 03/26/2024. Ana De La Sierra terminated. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANDRES MASQUEDA SERRANO, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. ROBERT RUDAS, et al., Case No.: 1:22-cv-00950-KES-CDB ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS (Doc. 17) Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Andres Masqueda Serrano is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 18 rights action filed pursuant to 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 February 15, 2024, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and 21 recommendations, recommending this action proceed only on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment 22 deliberate indifference to serious medical needs claim against Defendant Rudas, that Defendant 23 De La Sierra be dismissed from the action, and that any remaining claims in Plaintiff’s complaint 24 be dismissed. (Doc. 17.) The findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and 25 contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen (14) days of service. The 26 Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff that the “failure to file objections within the specified time 27 may result in waiver of his rights on appeal.” (Id. at 2, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 28 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014); Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). No objections 1 2 have been filed, and the deadline to do so has expired. (See docket.) In accordance with the provision of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court has conducted a de 3 novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and 4 recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations issued February 15, 2024 (Doc. 17) are 7 8 ADOPTED in full; 2. This action PROCEEDS solely on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment deliberate 9 indifference to serious medical needs claim against Defendant Rudas; 10 3. Defendant Ana De La Sierra is DISMISSED from the action; 11 4. The remaining claims in Plaintiff’s complaint are DISMISSED; and 12 5. This matter is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. 13 14 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 26, 2024 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?