Wiggin v. Rollins et al

Filing 166

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS by Judge Benjamin H Settle re 164 Objections to Report and Recommendation filed by James O'Neil Wiggin. (TG; cc mailed to plaintiff)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

6
7

JAMES O'NEIL WIGGIN,

8
9
10

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. C13-5057 BHS
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION

v.
WILLIAM ROLLINS, et al.,

11

Defendants.

12
13

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)

14 of the Honorable Karen L. Strombom, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 161), and
15 Plaintiff James O’Neil Wiggin’s (“Wiggin”) objections to the R&R (Dkt. 164).
16

On December 16, 2013, Judge Strombom issued the R&R recommending that the

17 Court grant Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Wiggin’s claims for violations
18 of the Eight Amendment based on allegations of inadequate medical care and inadequate
19 conditions of confinement. Dkt. 161. On December 26, 2013, Wiggin filed objections.
20 Dkt. 164. On January 6, 2014, Defendants responded. Dkt. 165.
21

The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's

22 disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or

ORDER - 1

1 modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the
2 magistrate judge with instructions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 (b)(3).
3

In this case, Wiggin fails to meet the high burden to state a constitutional claim for

4 relief. After review of the file, it is clear that (1) Wiggin has received extensive medical
5 treatment and numerous consultations and (2) Wiggin merely disagrees with the medical
6 recommendations. Such disagreement, however, is insufficient to state a valid
7 constitutional claim for cruel and unusual punishment. Contrary to Wiggin’s objection,
8 Judge Strombom did not resolve questions of fact in her R&R; instead she found that
9 Wiggin had failed to show that a question of fact exists on the issue of whether any
10 Defendant had acted with deliberate indifference to Wiggin’s serious medical needs. The
11 Court agrees with Judge Strombom’s conclusion. Therefore, the Court having considered
12 the R&R, Wiggin’s objections, and the remaining record, does hereby find and order as
13 follows:
14

(1)

The R&R is ADOPTED;

15

(2)

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED;

16

(3)

Wiggin’s in forma pauperis status is REVOKED; and

17

(4)

This action is DISMISSED.

18

Dated this 17th day of January, 2014.

A

19
20

BENJAMIN H. SETTLE
United States District Judge

21
22

ORDER - 2