Baniga

(PC) Fredrickson v. Baniga

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 11, 20211:20-cv-00398California1,091 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WARREN FREDRICKSON, No. 1:20-cv-00398-DAD-EPG (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR RECONSIDERATION

v. (Doc. No. 18) U. BANIGA, et al., Defendants. 16 Warren Frederickson (“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. On August 31, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint and issued findings and recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. (Doc. No. 13.) The magistrate judge concluded that plaintiff “sufficiently alleged that he had a serious medical need” in connection with an injury to his foot, “and that certain nurses and doctors were aware of this need,” but that he “has not sufficiently alleged that any of the nurses or doctors were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical need. (Id. at 7.) Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file…

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.