Steele v. McMahon et al

Filing 5

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Dale A. Drozd on 09/29/05 recommending that defendant CHP be dismissed from the case. Written objections to be filed w/in 20 days. Referred to Judge Karlton. (Brown, T)

(PC) Steele v. McMahon et al

Doc. 5

Case 2:05-cv-01874-DAD

Document 5

Filed 09/30/2005

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. MARK McMAHON, et al., Defendants. / In an order filed concurrently with these findings and recommendations, the undersigned has screened the prisoner plaintiff's complaint and determined that plaintiff has sued a state agency for monetary damages. The Eleventh Amendment serves as a jurisdictional bar to such a suit. See Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332 (1979); Alabama v. Pugh, 438 U.S. 781 (1978) (per curiam); Jackson v. Hayakawa, 682 F.2d 1344, 1349-50 (9th Cir. 1982). Because the California Highway Patrol is immune from the relief sought, plaintiff's claims against this defendant lack an arguable legal basis and should be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendant California Highway Patrol be dismissed from this action. These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 1
Dockets.Justia.com

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GARRY G. STEELE, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1874 LKK DAD P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Case 2:05-cv-01874-DAD

Document 5

Filed 09/30/2005

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. A document containing objections should be titled "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may, under certain circumstances, waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: September 29, 2005.

DAD:13 stee1874.56

2