Rohrdanz

(PC) Bahena v. Rohrdanz

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 3, 20201:20-cv-00618California359 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ESMELING L. BAHENA, Case No. 1:20-cv-00618-SKO (PC)

Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS

v.

D. ROHRDANZ, et al., 14-DAY DEADLINE

Defendants. Clerk of the Court to assign a District Judge 16 On September 23, 2020, the Court screened Plaintiff’s complaint and found that it states cognizable claims of deliberate indifference to serious medical needs against Defendants Manhas and Rohrdanz but not against the remaining defendants. (Doc. 11.) The Court, therefore, directed Plaintiff to file a first amended complaint curing the deficiencies in his pleading, or to notify the Court that he wishes to proceed only on the claims found cognizable and to dismiss the remaining claims and defendants. (Id. at 1, 8.) On October 29, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice that he wishes to proceed only on the claims the “court finds cognizable.” (Doc. 14.) Accordingly, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s screening…

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.