Montejo

(PC) Stephen v. Montejo

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 18, 20242:18-cv-01796California4,957 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JIMMIE EARL STEPHENS, No. 2:18-cv-1796 KJM DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

E. MONTEJO, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiff alleges defendant was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in the treatment of his prostate. Before the court are both parties’ motions for summary judgment and plaintiff’s motion to strike. For the reasons set forth below, this court denies plaintiff’s motion to strike, recommends plaintiff’s motion be denied, and recommends defendant’s motion be granted. BACKGROUND This case is proceeding on plaintiff’s third amended complaint filed March 2, 2020. (ECF No. 67.) Plaintiff alleges that in late 2018, defendant Dr. Montejo refused to order further testing, a biopsy, or a special diet for potential prostate cancer after an examination of…

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.