Diaz v. Martel et al
| Randolph M. Diaz |
| M Martel, S Heatly, Wheeler and Ram |
| 2:2010cv01388 |
| June 7, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Amador |
| Kendall J. Newman |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
43
ORDER ; FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/5/14 ORDERING that Defendants objections to plaintiffs evidence and motion to strike (ECF No. 42 ) are overruled; and Defendants motion to strike (ECF No. [ 42]) is denied. It is RECOMMENDED that Defendants motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 36 ) be granted; Judgment be entered for defendant Dr. W. Hashimoto; and this action be closed. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/16/13 ORDERING that within 30 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any, to the motion for summary judgment. Failure to file an opposition will be deemed as consent to have the: (a) action dismissed for lack of prosecution; and (b) action dismissed based on plaintiff's failure to comply with these rules and a court order. Such failure shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (Kastilahn, A)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/13/13 denying 34 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 1/29/2013 ORDERING that the 30 findings and recommendations are ADOPTED IN FULL. Defendants' 22 motion to dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendant Smith is DISMISSED f rom this action without prejudice. Summary judgment in favor of Defendant Hashimoto is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's pendent state law claims for damages. This action shall proceed against Defendant Hashimoto based on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
30
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/6/2012 RECOMMENDING that defendants' 22 motion to dismiss be granted in part; defendant Smith be dismissed without prejudice; summary judgment in favor of defe ndant Hashimoto be granted with respect to plaintiff's pendent state law claims for damages; and this action proceed against Hashimoto based on plaintiff's Eight Amendment deliberate indifference claim. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/24/12 ORDERING that Defendant's request 25 to accord plaintiff an extension of time within which to file and serve an opposition to defendants' pending motion to dismiss, is granted; Plaintiff shall file and serve an opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss within twenty-eight (28) days after the filing date of this order; Defendants may file and serve a reply to plaintiff's opposition within fourteen (14) days after service of plaintiff's opposition; and this court's order filed June 20, 2012 24 requiring that plaintiff file his opposition within thirty days, is vacated. (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/20/2012 ORDERING that, within 30 days, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any, to the 22 motion to dismiss. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 2/29/2012 ADOPTING 16 Findings and Recommendations in full; DISMISSING defendants M. Martel and Ram from this action without prejudice. (Michel, G)
|
|
Filing
16
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/06/12 ORDERING plaintiff's current motion to proceed in forma pauperis 15 is denied as duplicative. Plaintiff proceeds in form pauperis pursuant to his a pplication filed 06/23/10 8 . Service is appropriate for defendants Hashimoto and Smith. The clerk of the court shall send plaintiff 2 USM-285 forms, instruction sheet, 1 summons and a copy of the 07/14/11 amended complaint to be completed and returned within 30 days. Also, RECOMMENDING that Defendants Ram and Martel be dismissed from this action without prejudice. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England Jr. Objections due within 14 days.(Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER DIRECTING MONTHLY PAYMENTS be made from Prison Account of Randolph M. Diaz signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 06/07/11. CDC is to collect payments from plaintiff's account and forward to the clerk until the $350.00 filing fee is paid in full. Clerk to serve this order and a copy of plaintiff's IFP on the Director of CDC. Clerk to also serve Financial with a copy of this order. (cc: CDC Director and Financial) (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/11/10 ORDERING that within 30 days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the Notice of Submission and submit the following documents to the court: A complete Application to Proce ed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner; and a certified copy of plaintiffs prison trust account statement for the six month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint. Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a new Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner.(Dillon, M)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
