Hanna v. Mariposa County Sheriff Dept. et al

Filing 96

ORDER adopting 87 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; granting 57 Motion to Set Aside Default and REFERRING CASE back to Magistrate Judge signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 1/23/2014. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RICHARD CHARLES HANNA,

12
13

Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:12-cv-00501-AWI-SAB
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

v.
(ECF Nos. 57-71, 82, 87, 91)

14

MARIPOSA COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT.
et al.,

15
Defendants.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Plaintiff Richard Charles Hanna is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate
Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On September 10, 2013, default
was entered against Defendants Boehm, King, Mariposa County Sheriff Department, Rameriz,
and Rumfelt.
On January 9, 2014, the Magistrate Judge filed a Findings and Recommendations
recommending setting aside the Entry of Default which was served on the parties and which
contained notice to the parties that any objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to
be filed within thirty days. On January 21, 2014, Plaintiff filed an Objection.
In his objection, Plaintiff argues that he has been prejudiced due to “evidence” having
been destroyed. There is nothing in the record to suggest that there has been the destruction of

28
1

1

any evidence in this action. Plaintiff’s conclusory statements are not sufficient to establish that he

2

will suffer any prejudice in this action. Should this action survive the motion to dismiss, the

3

Court will issue an order opening discovery in this action. If Plaintiff discovers that evidence has

4

actually been destroyed, the issue will be addressed at that time.

5

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a

6

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the

7

Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

8

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

9

1.

10

The Findings and Recommendations, filed January 9, 2014, is ADOPTED IN
FULL;

11

2.

The Entry of Default filed September 10, 2013 is SET ASIDE; and

12

3.

This action is referred back to the magistrate judge.

13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 23, 2014
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2