Geraldine Pierce et al v. Donald J. Trump et al

Filing 43

ORDER VACATING FEBRUARY 27, 2018 ORDER AND JUDGMENT; REOPENING CASE; AND ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Manuel L. Real. The Court is not persuaded by Plaintiffs Objections. The Court hereby accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. IT IS ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. (see order for details) (Made JS-5, Case reopened) (hr)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GERALDINE PIERCE, et al., Plaintiffs, 12 13 14 15 v. DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., Defendants. Case No. CV 17-07267-R (RAO) ORDER VACATING FEBRUARY 27, 2018 ORDER AND JUDGMENT; REOPENING CASE; AND ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 On February 2, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and 18 Recommendation (“Report”) recommending dismissal of the Complaint. Dkt. No. 19 38. Objections to the Report were due on February 22, 2018. Dkt. No. 37. On 20 February 27, 2018, the Court accepted the Report, dismissed the action, and entered 21 judgment. Dkt. Nos. 40-41. 22 At the time the Court entered judgment, no Objections had been entered on 23 the docket. However, the Court is now aware that Objections were timely filed. 24 The Objections were mailed on February 21, 2018, and received by the Court 25 mailroom on February 23, 2018. See Dkt. No. 42. The Objections were entered on 26 the docket on March 2, 2018. See id. Because the Court had not considered the 27 timely-filed Objections in its prior order accepting the Report, the Court finds it 28 appropriate to reopen the case to consider the Objections. The February 27, 2018 1 Order Accepting Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 40) and Judgment (Dkt. 2 No. 41) are VACATED. The action is REOPENED for the purpose of considering 3 the Objections to the Report. 4 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint (Dkt. No. 5 1), all of the other records and files herein, and the Report. Further, the Court 6 engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which Plaintiff 7 objected. 8 Plaintiff objects to the dismissal of the case, setting forth various arguments 9 regarding standing and joinder. The Objections do not dispute that Seavon Pierce 10 has prepared the documents in this case, or that Geraldine Pierce has filed the 11 Complaint and other documents on behalf of and at the request of her son, Seavon. 12 Based on the representations made by Geraldine to the Magistrate Judge at the 13 February 1, 2018 hearing, and the similarities between the filings in this case and 14 the filings in other actions brought by Seavon, the Court finds that Seavon is 15 attempting to sidestep the Vexatious Litigant Order1 by having his mother, 16 Geraldine, file his documents in this Court. The Court has the authority to dismiss 17 the action as a violation of the Vexatious Litigant Order. See Ryan v. Hyden, No. 18 12cv14890MMA (BLM), 2012 WL 4793116, at *3-4 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 9, 2012) 19 (finding case may be properly dismissed where it was “abundantly clear” that 20 vexatious litigant was using his parents to sidestep a vexatious litigant order). 21 The Court clarifies that the dismissal is without prejudice to Seavon Pierce 22 requesting leave to file a complaint pursuant to the Vexatious Litigant Order and 23 without prejudice to Geraldine Pierce filing a complaint on her own behalf. 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 28 1 Seavon Pierce v. The U.S. Government, et al., CV 16-8010-VAP (JEM), Dkt. No. 13. 2 1 Accordingly, the Court is not persuaded by Plaintiff’s Objections. The Court 2 hereby accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the 3 Magistrate Judge. 4 IT IS ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. 5 6 DATED: March 6, 2018 7 8 9 ___________________________________ MANUEL L. REAL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?