(PC) Rannels v. Smith
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL W. RANNELS, Case No. 1:21-cv-00049-KES-SKO (PC)
12 Plaintiff,
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
13 v. TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS PUYAGOYA
AND SOMMERS
14 SMITH, et al., 14-DAY OBJECTION PERIOD 15 Defendants.
16 17 Plaintiff Daniel W. Rannels is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action brought 18 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment deliberate 19 indifference to serious medical needs claims against Defendants Smith, Tortrice, Sommers and 20 Puyagoya. 21 I. INTRODUCTION 22 Following screening of the second amended complaint, this Court issued its Order Finding 23 Service Appropriate on February 5, 2024. (Doc. 33.) Service of Defendants Steve Smith, Stoc 24 Tortrice, Sommers and Puyagoya was to be effected under the Court’s e-service pilot program. 25 (Id. at 1-2.) The Order included the following information regarding Defendants Puyagoya and 26 Sommers: “Puyagoya, allegedly employed as a doctor at the…