Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01162/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01162-5/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THOMAS V. HELEAN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-1162 LKK EFB P

vs.

D. HAWLEY, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in a civil rights action. See 42

U.S.C. 1983.

On August 30, 2006, the court dismissed, with leave to amend, plaintiff’s claims against

defendants Shasta County Jail, Shasta County Jail medical staff, and “P.H.S. medical provider.” 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court informed plaintiff he could proceed against D. Hawley by

submitting materials for service. However, the court further informed him that his election to do

so would be construed as consent to dismiss his claims against defendant Shasta County Jail,

Shasta County Jail medical staff, and “P.H.S. medical provider” without leave to amend. 

Plaintiff has submitted materials for service of defendant D. Hawley.

The court finds plaintiff has consented to dismissal of claims against the Shasta County

Jail, Shasta County Jail medical staff, and “P.H.S. medical provider,” without leave to amend.

Case 2:06-cv-01162-LKK -EFB Document 21 Filed 01/03/07 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

2

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that claims against the Shasta County Jail,

Shasta County Jail medical staff, and “P.H.S. medical provider,” be dismissed without prejudice. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: December 29, 2006.

Case 2:06-cv-01162-LKK -EFB Document 21 Filed 01/03/07 Page 2 of 2