Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Guerrero v. United States

United States District Court, C.D. California

November 25, 2014

Arthur B. Guerrero
v.
United States of America, et al

Attorney(s) for Plaintiff(s): None Present.

Attorney(s) for Defendant(s): None Present.

CIVIL MINUTES--GENERAL

Honorable JESUS G. BERNAL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Proceedings: Order: (1) GRANTING Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 14 and (2) VACATING the December 1, 2014 hearing (IN CHAMBERS)

Before the Court is Defendant United States of America's Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. No. 14.) The Court finds this matter suitable for resolution without a hearing pursuant to Local Rule 7-15. For the reasons discussed below, Defendant's unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and judgment will be entered against Plaintiff. The December 1, 2014 hearing is VACATED.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

On June 6, 2013, Plaintiff Arthur Guerrero (" Plaintiff") filed a Complaint, in pro per, against Defendants United States of America and Chandra Shanks (" Shanks"). (Doc. No. 1) The Complaint alleges Shanks -- a Physician Assistant employed by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (" VA") -- injured Plaintiff when she used a common neurological device, known as a Wartenberg pinwheel, to test sensation in Plaintiff's lower extremities. (Compl. at 3) Plaintiff alleges that as a result of Shanks's negligent use of the pinwheel he expiences permanent pain, numbness, and tingling in his feet as well as post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms. (Id.) Plaintiff asserts a claim of medical malpractice under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § § 1346(b) & 2671, et seq., against Defendant United States (" Defendant").[1] (Id.)

On October 27, 2014, Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. (" Motion, " Doc. No. 14.) In support of the Motion, Defendant attached:

o Statement of Undisputed Facts (" SUF, " Doc. No. 14-2);
o Declaration of H. Ronald Fisk (" Fisk Decl., " Doc. No. 15);
o Declaration of Chondra Shanks (" Shanks Decl., " Doc. No. 16), attesting to three exhibits; and
o Declaration of Sekret Sneed (" Sneed Decl., " Doc. No. 17), attesting to two exhibits Plaintiff did not ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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