Tommy Lee Wiley III v. Correctional Officer Rosales et al

Filing 57

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald for Report and Recommendation (Issued) 56 , MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint 50 (hr)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TOMMY LEE WILEY, III, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 15 16 v. CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ROSALES, et al., Case No. CV 19-1837 MWF (PVC) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Defendants. 17 18 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Second Amended 19 Complaint in the above-captioned matter, all the records and files herein, and the Report 20 and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The time for filing 21 Objections to the Report and Recommendation has passed and no Objections have been 22 received. Accordingly, the Court accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions and 23 recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, with the following amendment: the case 24 citation on page 14, line 23 of the Report is corrected to read: Valandingham v. 25 Bojorquez, 866 F.2d 1135, 1138 (9th Cir. 1989). In particular, the Court agrees with the 26 Magistrate Judge that, after three attempts, any further amendment would be futile. 27 28 1 Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint is thus 2 GRANTED without leave to amend. IT IS ORDERED that Judgment shall be entered 3 dismissing this action with prejudice. 4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk serve copies of this Order and the 5 Judgment herein on Plaintiff at his current address of record and on counsel for 6 Defendants. 7 8 LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. 9 10 11 12 DATED: April 27, 2021 MICHAEL W. FITZGERALD UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?