Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Matthews v. Lahey

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 22, 2009

JOSEPH B. MATTHEWS PLAINTIFF,
v.
LAHEY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Pursuant to this court's Order and Findings and Recommendations filed November 17, 2009, and this court's Order filed December 3, 2009, defendants have filed a response to this court's inquiries concerning plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction, specifically, whether plaintiff has been provided an exercise resistance band, and whether a clavicle brace would be beneficial to plaintiff at this stage of his recovery.

Chief Medical Officer of California State Prison -- Solano, A. Traquina, M.D., has filed a declaration, dated December 11, 2009, stating that plaintiff received the exercise resistance band on November 6, 2009, but that use of a clavicle brace is contraindicated. Dr. Traquina stated that he has reviewed plaintiff's medical chart and recently spoken with plaintiff's physical therapist. Dr. Traquina concludes:

Mr. Matthews would not benefit from a clavicle brace at this point in his recovery and rehabilitation. Mr. Matthews has improved his strength and range of motion through the exercises provided by the physiotherapist, and a clavicle brace at this point in his recovery would be contraindicated as it would impede Mr. Matthews' range of motion, and interfere with his physical therapy.

Docket 23-2, ¶ 3.

This court's Order and Findings and Recommendations filed November 17, 2009, recommended that plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction be granted in part and denied in part, "pending further receipt" of the information described above. This information is consistent with the original recommendation of this court, which awaits adoption by the district judge. No further preliminary relief is warranted at this time.

20091222

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.