Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00711/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00711-6/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADAM SHARPE,

Plaintiff,

v.

STU SHERMAN, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:19-cv-00711-DAD-EPG (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, PERMITTING 

ACTION TO PROCEED WITH CERTAIN 

CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS, AND 

DISMISSING ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND 

DEFENDANTS

(Doc. No. 14)

Plaintiff Adam Sharpe is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this 

civil rights action pursuant to 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 302. 

On December 6, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 

recommendations, recommending that this action proceed only with plaintiff’s Eighth 

Amendment medical indifference claims against defendants C. Cryer, J. Lewis, and S. Gates, and 

with his Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim brought against defendant S. Smith. (Doc. 

No. 14 at 1.) The magistrate judge also recommended that all other claims and defendants be 

dismissed from this action due to plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. (Id. at 2.) The findings and 

recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections were to be 

Case 1:19-cv-00711-KES-EPG Document 33 Filed 06/16/20 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

filed within fourteen (14) days of service. (Id.) No objections have been filed, and the time to do 

so has now passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, the

court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 

court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly:

1. The findings and recommendations issued on December 6, 2019 (Doc. No. 14) are 

adopted in full;

2. This action now proceeds on plaintiff’s first amended complaint (Doc. No. 14) on 

the following claims:

a. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical indifference claims against 

defendants C. Cryer, J. Lewis, and S. Gates; and

b. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim against defendant S. 

Smith;

3. All other claims and defendants are dismissed from this case; and

4. This case is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings, 

including initiation of service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 16, 2020 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00711-KES-EPG Document 33 Filed 06/16/20 Page 2 of 2