Dias v. Avila et al

Filing 13

ORDER VACATING JANUARY 8, 2025 HEARING, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 01/03/2025. The Court hereby VACATES the January 8, 2025 hearing on the second motion to dismiss as improperly set before the magistrate judge. (Deputy Clerk JN)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SEAN DIAS, Plaintiff, 12 13 Case No. 1:24-cv-00354-KES-SAB ORDER VACATING JANUARY 8, 2025 HEARING v. 14 WILLIAM AVILA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On March 26, 2024, Defendants removed this action and soon thereafter moved to 18 dismiss. (ECF Nos. 1, 4.) On May 7, 2024, the undersigned prepared findings and 19 recommendations, recommending that the complaint be dismissed with leave to amend. (ECF 20 No. 8.) The matter was then reassigned to a district judge to rule on the Court’s findings and 21 recommendations, which remains pending. (ECF No. 7.) Notwithstanding the pending findings 22 and recommendations, on November 20, 2024, Defendants filed a subsequent motion to dismiss, 23 arguing that Plaintiff had failed to file an amended complaint and that the complaint should be 24 dismissed with prejudice. (ECF No. 11.) It appears that this motion is not ripe because the 25 complaint has not yet been authorized. 26 In any event, Defendants have improperly set the subsequent motion to dismiss before the 27 undersigned. As stated above, this matter has been reassigned to a district judge, and therefore, 28 the motion to dismiss must be referred to the undersigned. L.R. 304(a); see 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). 1 Accordingly, the Court hereby VACATES the January 8, 2025 hearing on the second 1 2 motion to dismiss as improperly set before the magistrate judge. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: January 3, 2025 STANLEY A. BOONE United States Magistrate Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 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?