Reed v. Vera et al

Filing 64

ORDER DENYING 53 Motion to Withdraw; ORDER ADOPTING 60 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 7/11/2019. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

MYCHAL REED,

9

Plaintiff,

10

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

v.

11

Case No. 1:18-cv-00297-AWI-EPG (PC)

D. MADSEN,

12

(ECF NOS. 53 & 60)
Defendant.

13
14

Mychal Reed (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

15

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States

16

magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

17
18

This case was closed on April 2, 2019 (ECF No. 52), based on a stipulation for
voluntary dismissal with prejudice, which was filed on April 2, 2019 (ECF No. 51).

19

On April 15, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion to withdraw from his settlement agreement

20

with Defendant. (ECF No. 53). On May 31, 2019, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered

21

findings and recommendations, recommending “that Plaintiff’s Motion to Withdraw from the

22

Settlement Agreement (ECF No. 53) be DENIED.” (ECF No. 60, p. 5).

23
24

Plaintiff was provided an opportunity to file objections to the findings and
recommendations. On June 14, 2019, Plaintiff filed his objections. (ECF No. 62).

25

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 304, this

26

Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. The “retaliation” complained of occurred

27

after the settlement was signed. The Court agrees that the conduct had no effect on the decision

28

to sign the settlement. Further, Plaintiff has not shown that the incorrect SSN was material to
1

1

the terms of the settlement.1 Thus, having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the

2

findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

3

Accordingly, the COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

4

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the magistrate judge on May 31, 2019,

5
6

are ADOPTED IN FULL;
2. Plaintiff’s motion to withdraw from his settlement agreement with Defendant (ECF

7

No. 53) is DENIED; and

8

3. This case remains CLOSED.

9
10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 11, 2019
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
1

28

Nor does Plaintiff adequately address Defendant’s contention that a form can be used to correct

the erroneous SSN.
2