Nguyen v. Fernelius

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AT TACOMA NGHIA NGUYEN, Case No. 3:23-cv-05102-TMC Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION v. TODD COLEMAN, THERESA JOHNSON, and SCOTT LIGHT, Defendant.

The Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge David W. Christel (Dkt. 69), Plaintiff Nghia Nguyen’s objections to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 70), and the remaining record, does hereby find and ORDER: (1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation. a. The Court has conducted de novo review of the Report and Recommendation based on Mr. Nguyen’s objections. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). The Court will address each objection in turn. b. Mr. Nguyen first objects that “[t]he magistrate failed to view all facts in a light most favorable to Mr. Nguyen.” Dkt. 70 at 1. Specifically, Mr. Nguyen points to his allegations that Defendant Light was his primary care provider, that Defendants Coleman and Johnson were responsible for ensuring that he had appropriate medical care, and that the delay in surgery and steroid

injections for his chronic shoulder pain was medically unacceptable. But on summary judgment, the Court must consider the evidence in the record, not just Mr. Nguyen’s allegations. The Court agrees with Judge Christel that the evidence presented at summary judgment, even considered in the light most favorable to Mr. Nguyen, would not be sufficient for a reasonable jury to conclude that Defendants exhibited deliberate indifference to Mr. Nguyen by acting in conscious disregard of an excessive risk to his health. This objection is overruled. c. Mr. Nguyen’s second objection is that the Magistrate Judge “did not address

Nguyen’s claim of infliction of unnecessary pain by unreasonable delays in needed medical treatment.” Dkt. 70 at 1. But Judge Christel correctly framed Nguyen’s claim as concerning “the allegedly insufficient management of his shoulder pain and delay in receiving the steroid injection and shoulder surgery.” Dkt. 69 at 14. And the Court agrees with Judge Christel’s analysis that there is not sufficient evidence in the record from which a reasonable jury could conclude that the medical treatment provided before Mr. Nguyen ultimately received steroid injections and surgery reflected deliberate indifference. This objection is overruled. (2) Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 47) is granted, Plaintiff’s federal

claims are dismissed with prejudice, and Plaintiff’s state law claims are dismissed without prejudice. (3) Plaintiff may maintain his in forma pauperis status on appeal. (4) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Plaintiff, counsel for Defendants, and to the Hon. David W. Christel. Dated this 2nd day of May, 2025. Say Tiffany. Cartwright United States District Judge 1]