Shute

(PC) Jones v. Shute

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 1, 20242:22-cv-01384California4,644 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARCELL JONES, No. 2:22-cv-1384 DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MICHELLE SHUTE, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiff alleges defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment when they failed to provide timely treatment for his back condition. Before the court are defendants’ second motion to compel and motion for sanctions. For the reasons set forth below, this court grants in part defendants’ motion to compel and grants in part defendants’ motion for sanctions. BACKGROUND This case is proceeding on plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed here on October 6, 2022, against defendants Dr. Michelle Shute, plaintiff’s primary care physician, and Traci Patterson, CCHP Chief Executive Officer. (ECF No. 10.) On screening, this court found…

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.