Cooper v. Heatley et al

Filing 32

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/6/13 RECOMMENDING that Defendant H. Walter Pepper's 22 motion to dismiss be granted; Defendant H. Walter Pepper be dismissed from this action; and this action shall proceed against defendants Scott Heatley and Terry Weinholdt only. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GOLDYN COOPER,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:12-cv-00602 KJM DAD P

v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SCOTT HEATLEY, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42

17
18

U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants Dr. Scott Heatley, Dr. H. Walter Pepper and Terri Weinholdt.

19

On August 15, 2013, defendant H. Walter Pepper filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint

20

for failure to state a cognizable claim against him. When plaintiff failed to file a timely

21

opposition to the motion, the court ordered plaintiff to file his opposition or statement of non-

22

opposition within thirty days. (ECF No. 28.) Following plaintiff’s September 30, 2013 request

23

for an extension of time, the court again ordered plaintiff to file his opposition. (ECF No. 30.)

24

On September 30, 2013 and October 17, 2013, plaintiff filed statements of non-opposition to

25

defendant Pepper’s motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 29 at 2 and 31.)
In light of plaintiff’s statement of non-opposition to the granting of the pending motion, IT

26
27

IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

28

/////
1

1
2

fendant H. Walter Peppe August 1 2013 mo
W
er’s
15,
otion to dism (ECF No 22) be
miss
o.
1. Def
gr
ranted;

3

2. Def
fendant H. Walter Peppe be dismiss from this action; and
W
er
sed
s
d

4

3. Thi action shal proceed as to defendan Scott He
is
ll
s
nts
eatley and Te Weinho only.
erry
oldt

5

These findings and recommend
d
dations are s
submitted to the United States Distri Judge
o
ict

6

assigned to the case, pursu to the pr
e
uant
rovisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourt
f
teen days

7

aft being ser
fter
rved with the findings and recomm
ese
mendations, p
plaintiff may file written objections
y
n

8

wi the court. The docum should be captioned “Objection to Magistr Judge’s Findings
ith
ment
d
ns
rate
s

9

an Recomme
nd
endations.” Any respons to the obje
A
se
ections shall be filed and served wit
l
d
thin fourteen
n

10

da after serv of the ob
ays
vice
bjections. Pl
laintiff is adv
vised that fa
ailure to file objections w
within the

11

sp
pecified time may waive the right to appeal the D
District Cour order. M
rt’s
Martinez v. Y 951
Ylst,

12

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
h
.

13

Da
ated: Novem
mber 6, 2013
3

14
15
16
17

DA
AD:4
coo
op602.mtdPepper

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2