Schuyler

Smith v. Schuyler

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 8, 20233:23-cv-03864California2,216 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

23 Plaintiff alleges he suffers from an infection, abscess, and disc injury in his back, which is 24 very painful. (ECF No. 1 at 2.) He alleges on June 29, 2023, Defendant Dr. Singh sent him to the 25 hospital for a biopsy and intravenous antibiotics. (Id. at 3.) He was receiving pain medication that 26 he liked until July 6, 2023, when Defendant Dr. Bergen changed to a different pain medication 27 him back to the hospital for “stronger pain medication,” which Dr. Patberg refused to do. (Id. at 2- 3.) He returned to SVSP again and received morphine for three days until Dr. Singh discontinued it. (ECF No. 1 at 2-3.) STANDARD OF REVIEW Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such…

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.