Tamplen

(PC) Zaiza v. Tamplen

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 20202:15-cv-00447California440 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 JOSE R. ZAIZA, No. 2:15-cv-447-KJM-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER D. TAMPLEN, et al., Defendants. 15 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On March 1, 2019, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. See Findings & Recommendations (“Findings”), ECF No. 50. Both parties have filed objections to the findings and recommendations. In the Findings, the magistrate judge referred to a Health Care Services Request Form plaintiff filed on November 5, 2012, which references plaintiff’s deliberate indifference claims and is…

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.