Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00244/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00244-3/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

MICHELLE L. JOE, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:05-cv-00244-OWW-LJO-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 6)

ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN

CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS

Plaintiff Michelle J. Joe (“plaintiff”), a state prisoner

proceeding pro se, 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 August 22, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings

and Recommendations herein which was served on plaintiff and

which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30)

days. To date, plaintiff has not filed objections to the

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.

Case 1:05-cv-00244-OWW -LJO Document 12 Filed 10/12/05 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

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 August 22,

2005, is ADOPTED IN FULL;

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

filed February 22, 2005, against defendants Mekkam, Suryadevara,

Goodwin, and Kruse for acting with deliberate indifference to

plaintiff’s serious medical needs, in violation of the Eighth

Amendment; and,

3. Defendants Does 1-3, Schwarzenegger, Woodford, and

Kanan, and the Eighth Amendment claims against them, are

DISMISSED from this action based on plaintiff’s failure to state

any claims upon which relief may be granted against them.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 11, 2005 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00244-OWW -LJO Document 12 Filed 10/12/05 Page 2 of 2