Mahone v. McCarthy et al

Filing 56

ORDER ON REMAINING CLAIMS by Judge J Richard Creatura. Plaintiff has failed to amend his claim alleging a failure to train and claims asserting ADA and RA violations by the deadline imposed by the Court. This case is proceeding on plaintiffs two remaining claims. (MET)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 8 9 10 SYLVESTER JAMES MAHONE, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ORDER ON REMAINING CLAIMS v. PAT MCCARTHY et al., Defendants. 14 15 CASE NO. 3:14-CV-05812-BHS-JRC This 42 U.S.C. §1983 civil rights matter has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636 (b)(1)(A) and (B) and Local Magistrate Judge Rules MJR 1, MJR 3, and MJR 4. On September 22, 2015, defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. 27) was granted as to all of plaintiff’s claims except his Eighth Amendment claims for deliberate indifference as to plaintiff’s safety and deliberate indifference as to plaintiff’s medical needs. Dkt. 51. However, plaintiff was given leave to amend his claim alleging a failure to train and claims asserting violations of the Americans with Disabilities (ADA) and Rehabilitation Act (RA). Id. Plaintiff has failed to amend his claim alleging a failure to train and claims asserting ADA and RA 24 ORDER ON REMAINING CLAIMS - 1 1 violations by the deadline imposed by the Court. See Dkts. 47, 51, Dkt. entry dated September 2 22, 2015. Thus, this case is proceeding on plaintiff’s two remaining claims: (1) failure to take 3 reasonable steps to protect plaintiff’s safety against defendants McCarthy, Parker, Pastor, 4 Daniels, Spencer, Karr and Carn; and (2) failure to provide adequate medical care against 5 defendant Balderoma. 6 Dated this 2nd day of November, 2015. A 7 8 J. Richard Creatura United States Magistrate Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ORDER ON REMAINING CLAIMS - 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?