Senogor

(PC) Jones v. Senogor

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 27, 20212:17-cv-01422California2,886 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARK A. JONES, No. 2:17-cv-1422 KJM AC P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SENOGOR, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss the first amended complaint on the ground that the claims were not exhausted until after the original complaint was filed. ECF No. 37. Plaintiff opposes the motion. ECF No. 38. I. Factual and Procedural History A. Original Complaint Plaintiff filed his original complaint on July 6, 2017,1 alleging that Defendants Senogor and San Joaquin General Hospital violated his Eighth Amendment rights. ECF No. 1. The complaint alleged that Senogor performed Plaintiff’s back surgery at San Joaquin General 26 Since plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se, the filing date is determined according to the prison mailbox rule. …

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.