Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00536/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00536-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAYMOND D. CROWDER, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

DR. K. KIM, 

Defendant.

 /

1:05-cv-00536-OWW-LJO-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 15)

ORDER DISMISSING CLAIM AND

DEFENDANT (Doc. 1)

Plaintiff Raymond D. Crowder (“plaintiff”), a state prisoner

proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil

rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter

was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On June 22, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and

Recommendations herein which was served on plaintiff and which

contained notice to plaintiff that any objection to the Findings

and Recommendations was to be filed within thirty days. The

Findings and Recommendations was re-served on August 14, 2006, due

to plaintiff’s change of address. To date, plaintiff has not filed

any objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

Case 1:05-cv-00536-LJO -GSA Document 21 Filed 09/26/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)

and Local Rule 73-305, this Court has conducted a de novo review of

this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court

finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the

record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed June 22, 2006, is

ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. This action shall proceed on plaintiff’s complaint filed

April 21, 2005, against defendant Kim for acting with deliberate

indifference to plaintiff’s medical needs, in violation of the

Eighth Amendment;

3. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical claim against

defendant Medical Supervisory Committee is DISMISSED, without

prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted under section 1983; and,

4. Defendant Medical Supervisory Committee is DISMISSED from

this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 23, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00536-LJO -GSA Document 21 Filed 09/26/06 Page 2 of 2