Lopez

(PC) Weaver v. Lopez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 10, 20231:20-cv-00699California1,540 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

22 Plaintiff Weaver, a state prisoner, is proceeding pro se on his initial civil rights complaint 23 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging claims of medical deliberate indifference under the Eighth 24 Amendment. (Doc. No. 1, “Complaint”). On March 2, 2023, the Court issued a screening order 25 finding the Complaint failed to state a cognizable Eighth Amendment medical deliberate 26 indifference claim. (See generally Doc. No. 9). Plaintiff was given three options to exercise 27 within twenty-one (21) days from receipt of the March 2, 2023 Order: (1) file a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”); (2) file a notice that he intends to stand on his initial complaint subject to the undersigned recommending the district court dismiss for reasons stated in the March 2, 2023 Screening Order; or (3) file a notice to voluntarily dismiss this action, without prejudice, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1) because no defendant had yet been served. (Id. at 9, ¶ 1). The Court expressly warned Plaintiff that if he “fails to timely respond to this Court Order, i.e., fails to elect and notify the Court of any of the three options, the undersigned will instead 7 …

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.