Cueva

(PC) Carr v. Cueva

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 11, 20252:24-cv-01680California2,129 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PAUL DAVID CARR, No. 2:24-cv-01680 DJC AC P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DANIEL E. CUEVA, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner who filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. For the reasons stated below, the undersigned recommends plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order be denied. I. Background A. The Complaint Plaintiff alleged that defendant Dr. Dail was deliberately indifferent to plaintiff’s nutritional needs when defendant refused to renew plaintiff’s chrono for in cell feeding even though it had been approved by three prior doctors for the previous four years. ECF No. 10 at 5. Plaintiff named defendant Cueva, the prison warden, as an additional defendant but did not allege facts against him. 28 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.