Lopez v. Krieg, et al.

Filing 69

ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/29/2014 ADOPTING 66 Findings and Recommendations in full, GRANTING 38 & 55 Motions to Dismiss, DISMISSING 1 Complaint with leave to amend, DENYING 52 Motion to Amend the Complaint, DENYING as m oot 35 Motion to file a supplement complaint, GRANTING 40 Motion to Stay Discovery and DENYING as moot 59 Motion to Compel. Plaintiff shall file a first amended complaint limited to allegations of inadequate dental care at SCC within 28 days of the date of this order. (Donati, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RICHARD LOPEZ,

12

No. 2:13-cv-1176 KJM AC P

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

J. KRIEG, et al.,

15

ORDER

Defendants.

16
17

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

18

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided

19

by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20

On July 21, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were

21

served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings

22

and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Plaintiff has filed objections to

23

the findings and recommendations and defendants Feitcher, Krieg, McDow, and Zamora have

24

filed a reply to plaintiff’s objections.

25

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

26

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

27

court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper

28

analysis.
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed July 21, 2014, are adopted in full;

3

2. The motion to dismiss filed by defendants Feitcher, Krieg and McDow (ECF No. 38) is

4

granted;

5

3. Defendant Zamora’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 55) is granted;

6

4. Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF No. 1) is dismissed with leave to amend;

7

5. Plaintiff shall file a first amended complaint limited to allegations of inadequate dental

8
9

care at SCC within twenty-eight days of the date of this order;
6. Plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint (ECF No. 52) is denied;

10

7. Plaintiff’s motion to file a supplemental complaint (ECF No. 35) is denied as moot;

11

8. The motion to stay discovery filed by defendants Feitcher, McDow and Krieg (ECF

12
13
14

No. 40) is granted; and
9. Plaintiff’s motion to compel (ECF No. 59) is denied as moot.
DATED: September 29, 2014.

15
16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2