Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00214/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00214-1/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JORGE DELAGUA Y CULEBRO,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

H. LONGIA, M.D., et al.,

 Defendants.

1:15-cv-00214-DAD-EPG-PC

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, 

RECOMMENDING THAT THIS CASE BE 

DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO STATE A 

CLAIM UNDER SECTION 1983

OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN 

THIRTY DAYS

(ECF No. 1.)

Jorge Delagua Y Culebro (“Plaintiff”), a former state prisoner, is proceeding pro se and 

in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the 

Complaint commencing this action on February 9, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) In the Complaint, 

Plaintiff claims that various defendants denied him medical care in the form of a surgery due to 

degenerative condition of Plaintiff’s vertebrae.

The Court screened the Complaint and found that Plaintiff failed to state any claims 

upon which relief can be granted under § 1983. On March 30, 2016, the Court issued an order 

for Plaintiff to either file an amended complaint or notify the Court that he stands on the 

Complaint as filed, subject to recommendation of dismissal, within thirty days. (ECF No. 10.) 

The Court’s order provided an explanation of the relevant law to inform the Plaintiff should he 

desire to file an amended Complaint.

Case 1:15-cv-00214-DAD-EPG Document 11 Filed 08/16/16 Page 1 of 2
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

The thirty-day deadline has passed, and Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, 

submitted a notice to the Court, or otherwise responded to the Court’s order. (Court Record.) 

As a result, there is no pleading on file which sets forth any claims upon which relief may be 

granted.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915A 

and 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e), this action be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim 

upon which relief may be granted under ' 1983, and that this dismissal be subject to the “threeStrikes” provision set forth in 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(g). Silva v. Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1098 (9th 

Cir. 2011).

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(l). Within

thirty (30) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may 

file written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to 

Magistrate Judge=s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 

objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. 

Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 

(9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 16, 2016 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00214-DAD-EPG Document 11 Filed 08/16/16 Page 2 of 2