Bridgewater v. Cate, et al

Filing 76

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 07/23/14 ordering plaintiff's motion to dismiss defendant Hickman 74 is granted. Defendant Hickman is dismissed from this action. Plaintiff's motion to proceed solely against defendants Virga and Turner 75 is granted. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KEITH BRIDGEWATER,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.

No. 2:10-cv-2971 TLN DAD P

ORDER

MATTHEW CATE, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief

17
18

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On May 28, 2014, the court issued an order requiring plaintiff to show cause in writing

19
20

why the court should not dismiss defendant Hickman as an improper party to this action. On June

21

5, 2014, plaintiff requested an extension of time to respond to the court’s order, which the court

22

granted. Plaintiff has since filed a request to voluntarily dismiss defendant Hickman and therein

23

has made clear that he does not wish to amend his complaint to proceed against Matthew Cate.

24

Instead, plaintiff has indicated he wishes to proceed in this action solely against defendants Virga

25

and Turner. Good cause appearing, the court will honor plaintiff’s requests.

26

/////

27

/////

28

/////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss defendant Hickman (Doc. No. 74) is granted. Defendant

3
4

Hickman is dismissed from this action; and
2. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed solely against defendants Virga and Turner (Doc. No. 75)

5

is granted. This action shall proceed on plaintiff’s claims against defendants Virga and Turner

6

and in accordance with the court’s discovery and scheduling ordered issued on June 19, 2014.

7

Dated: July 23, 2014

8
9
10

DAD:9
brid2971.dism

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2