Al Savin et al v. Gloria Savin et al

Filing 82

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge S. James Otero. The Court accepts and adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. It is Ordered that: (1) summary judgment is gran ted in favor of Defendants County of Riverside and Maichi Ngoc Nguyen on the First, Third and Fourth Causes of Action; (2) judgment on the pleadings is granted in favor of Defendants Gloria Savin and Evan Ginsberg on the Second, Third and Fourth Caus es of Action, and these causes of action are dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend; (3) the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims is declined, and those claims are dismissed without prejudice; (4) the County Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is denied without prejudice as moot; and (5) Plaintiffs requests for sanctions are denied. (Attachments: # 1 R&R) (sp)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

AL SAVIN, et al.,

) NO. ED CV 14-1180-SJO(E)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS,
)
GLORIA SAVIN, et al.,
)
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
)
)
OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Defendants.
)
______________________________)

17
18

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636, the Court has reviewed the

19

Complaint, all of the records herein and the attached Report and

20

Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge.

21

has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and

22

Recommendation to which any objections have been made.

23

accepts and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation.

Further, the Court

The Court

24
25

IT IS ORDERED that: (1) summary judgment is granted in favor of

26

Defendants County of Riverside (DCSS) and Maichi Ngoc Nguyen on the

27

First, Third and Fourth Causes of Action; (2) judgment on the

28

pleadings is granted in favor of Defendants Gloria Savin and Evan

1

Ginsburg on the Second, Third and Fourth Causes of Action, and these

2

causes of action are dismissed with prejudice and without leave to

3

amend; (3) the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction over the state

4

law claims is declined, and those claims are dismissed without

5

prejudice; (4) the County Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is denied

6

without prejudice as moot; and (5) Plaintiffs’ requests for sanctions

7

are denied.

8
9

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk serve copies of this Order,

10

the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and the Judgment

11

herein on Plaintiffs and on counsel for Defendants.

12
13

DATED: June 8, 2015.

14
15
16

_______________________________
S. JAMES OTERO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2