Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_00-cv-05248/USCOURTS-caed-1_00-cv-05248-4/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

ANTONIO MASSIE,

Plaintiff,

v.

RICHARD EARLY, et al.,

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:00-cv-5248 OWW LJO P

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE

JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

This is a prisoner civil rights case brought under 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 for alleged deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s serious

medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. 

On August 31, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations recommending the motion to dismiss by Defendants

for failure to exhaust allegedly available administrative

remedies be denied and that the motion for summary adjudication

on Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Early be granted. 

Plaintiff timely filed objections and the Court has conducted a

de novo review pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

The Magistrate Judge has accurately analyzed the exhaustion

issue under prevailing Ninth Circuit precedent. There is no

reason to question the accuracy of that analysis. 

Case 1:00-cv-05248-OWW -LJO Document 85 Filed 01/09/06 Page 1 of 3
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

As to the summary adjudication claim against Warden Early,

Plaintiff has provided no evidence whatsoever of admissible

medical testimony that shows any knowledge on the part of

Defendant Early of a serious medical need or a failure to respond

to such a need. Nor is there any expert testimony that would

relate any action of the Warden to any medical condition

complained of by Plaintiff.

At most, Plaintiff shows he had one contact with the Warden

in which he advised the Warden that he had Hepatitis C and needed

a certain type of medical treatment which was allegedly

unavailable at the North Kern State Prison. Although assuming,

arguendo, drawing every inference in favor of Plaintiff and

against the non-moving party, that the Warden recognized a need

for follow-up medical attention, the Warden specifically advised

Plaintiff that the matter was a medical one and that Plaintiff

needed to have a physician diagnose Plaintiff’s medical condition

relevant to any request for transfer of institution. 

Plaintiff submits no evidence that the Warden is the proper

individual in the prison hierarchy to address a medical transfer

request to, or that there was any breach of duty on the part of

the Warden in referring Plaintiff to a medical doctor for further

review, analysis, and recommendation. 

There is no reason to question the accuracy of the analysis

of the recommendation that the summary adjudication motion of

Defendant Early be granted. 

For all the reasons stated above, IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Findings and Recommendations of the Magistrate

Judge are ADOPTED;

Case 1:00-cv-05248-OWW -LJO Document 85 Filed 01/09/06 Page 2 of 3
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

3

2. Defendant’s motion for summary adjudication on

Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Richard Early is GRANTED.

DATED: January 6, 2006.

/s/ OLIVER W. WANGER

_____________________________

Oliver W. Wanger

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

dlp/massie v. early order

Case 1:00-cv-05248-OWW -LJO Document 85 Filed 01/09/06 Page 3 of 3