Soto

(PC) Dukes v. Soto

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 6, 20231:21-cv-01570California347 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DARNELL DUKES, No. 1:21-cv-1570 JLT HBK (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE

v. ACTION, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF

COURT TO CLOSE THIS ACTION

TAMMY SOTO and JOHN PEARCE, (Doc. 12) Defendants. 16 Darnell Dukes seeks to hold the defendants liable for deliberate indifference to his serious medical need in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (See Doc. 11.) The magistrate judge found Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim, and further leave to amend would be futile. (Doc. 12 at 5-9.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the action be dismissed without leave to amend. (Id. at 10.) The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff on the same date, and it notified him that any objections must be filed within 14 days. (Id.) The Court also informed him that the “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on…

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.