Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_17-cv-01418/USCOURTS-caed-1_17-cv-01418-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Victor Quintana
Plaintiff
Scharffenberg
Defendant

Document Text:

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

VICTOR QUINTANA, 

 Plaintiff,

 v.

DR. SCHARFFENBERG,

 Defendant.

Case No. 1:17-cv-01418-LJO-EPG (PC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS

(ECF NOS. 34 & 40)

Victor Quintana (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding “against 

defendant Dr. Scharffenberg on Plaintiff’s claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical 

needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment.” (ECF No. 11, p. 7). 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 June 20, 2019, defendant Dr. Scharffenberg (“Defendant”) filed a motion for 

summary judgment. (ECF No. 34). On July 19, 2019, Plaintiff filed his opposition. (ECF No. 

38). Defendant filed his reply on July 26, 2019. (ECF No. 39).

On December 17, 2019, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and 

recommendations, recommending that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment be granted, 

that judgment be entered in favor of Defendant, and that this case be closed. (ECF No. 40). 

The parties were provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and 

recommendations. The deadline to file objections has passed and no objections have been 

Case 1:17-cv-01418-LJO-EPG Document 41 Filed 01/28/20 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

filed.

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

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

the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper 

analysis. 

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on December 17, 

2019, are ADOPTED in full;

2. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; and

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant and close 

this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 27, 2020 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:17-cv-01418-LJO-EPG Document 41 Filed 01/28/20 Page 2 of 2