Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-00130/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-00130-8/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Larry William Cortinas
Plaintiff
Stewart
Defendant

Document Text:

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

LARRY WILLIAM CORTINAS,

Plaintiff,

v.

COLVIN, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:21-cv-02291-DAD-CKD (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND GRANTING 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO SEVER 

DEFENDANT STEWART FROM THIS 

ACTION

(Doc. Nos. 32, 45)

Plaintiff Larry William Cortinas is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This 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 4, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and 

recommendations recommending that defendants’ motion to sever defendant Stewart from this 

action (Doc. No. 32) be granted because defendant Stewart was improperly joined. (Doc. No. 

45.) The magistrate judge further recommended that the claim plaintiff brought against defendant 

Stewart (an eighth amendment claim for deliberate indifference) be severed from this action and 

that a new case be opened for plaintiff to pursue that claim against defendant Stewart. (Id. at 6.) 

The pending findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that 

/////

Case 2:24-cv-00130-DAD-CKD Document 46 Filed 01/10/24 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

any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 7.) No 

objections have been filed, and the time in which to do so has now passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 

findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly, 

1. The findings and recommendations issued on December 4, 2023 (Doc. No. 45) are 

adopted in full;

2. Defendants’ motion to sever defendant Stewart from this action (Doc. No. 32) is 

granted;

3. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim against defendant 

Stewart is severed from this action;

4. Defendant Stewart is dismissed from this action;

5. The Clerk of Court is directed to assign a new case number to the Eighth 

Amendment deliberate indifference claim against defendant Stewart, and in 

particular:

a. The Clerk of the Court shall assign the same magistrate judge to the 

new action in the interest of judicial economy;

b. The filings from this case (No. 2:21-cv-02291) shall be included on 

the docket in the newly opened civil case; and

c. The filing fee for the new civil case is waived in accordance with 

Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to update the docket to reflect that defendant 

Stewart has been terminated as a named defendant in this action;

7. The stay of this case is lifted; and

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:24-cv-00130-DAD-CKD Document 46 Filed 01/10/24 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

8. This action is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further 

proceedings, including for the purpose of resetting the discovery and dispositive 

motions deadlines governing this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 9, 2024 

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:24-cv-00130-DAD-CKD Document 46 Filed 01/10/24 Page 3 of 3