Diaz v. Martel et al

Filing 31

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 1/29/2013 ORDERING that the 30 findings and recommendations are ADOPTED IN FULL. Defendants' 22 motion to dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendant Smith is DISMISSED f rom this action without prejudice. Summary judgment in favor of Defendant Hashimoto is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's pendent state law claims for damages. This action shall proceed against Defendant Hashimoto based on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

RANDOLPH DIAZ,
Plaintiff,

11
vs.

12
13

No. 2:10-cv-1388-MCE-KJN-P

M. MARTEL, et al.,
Defendants.

14

ORDER
/

15

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

16
17

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

18

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On December 7, 2012, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations

19
20

herein (ECF No. 30) which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties

21

that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days.

22

Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

23
24

supported by the record and by the Magistrate Judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

25

ORDERED that:

26

////
1

1
2
3
4

1. The findings and recommendations filed December 7, 2012 (ECF No. 30) are
ADOPTED IN FULL;
2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 22) is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART;

5

3. Defendant Smith is DISMISSED from this action without prejudice;

6

4. Summary judgment in favor of Defendant Hashimoto is GRANTED with

7
8
9
10

respect to Plaintiff’s pendent state law claims for damages; and
5. This action shall proceed against Defendant Hashimoto based on Plaintiff’s
Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim.
DATED: January 29, 2013

11
12
13

__________________________________________
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR., CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2