Brown

Brown v. Nguyen

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 7, 20233:23-cv-00593California2,228 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

14 Plaintiff Gregory L. Brown alleges that Dr. Nguyen at Salinas Valley State Prison 15 was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. His complaint containing these 16 allegations is now before me for review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). 17 Brown has stated a cognizable Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim 18 against Dr. Nguyen. All other claims and defendants are DISMISSED. The Court directs 19 defendant Nguyen to file in response to the complaint a dispositive motion, or a notice 20 regarding such motion, on or before September 11, 2023. 21 The Clerk shall TERMINATE all defendants with the exception of Dr. Nguyen. 22 Brown’s motion for a protective order is DENIED. (Dkt. No. 6.) The Clerk shall 23 terminate Dkt. No. 6.

DISCUSSION

25 A. Standard of Review 26 A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a 27 prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may…

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.