Hamer v. El Dorado County, et al

Filing 81

ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 04/13/10 DENYING 79 Motion for Reconsideration. (Williams, D)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. 14 EL DORADO COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 ----oo0oo---17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Presently before the Court is a document filed by Plaintiffs Patrick M. Hamer and Donna Lee Hamer, proceeding in pro se in this matter (hereinafter "Plaintiffs"). Plaintiffs' filing ORDER PATRICK MICHAEL HAMER; DONNA LEE HAMER, No. 2:08-cv-02269-MCE-EFB PS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

(Docket No. 79) is alternatively styled in three different fashions. First, the caption refers to a "Request for

Reconsideration by the District Court of Magistrate Judge's Ruling" on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 42). Second, Plaintiffs purport to file an "Objection" to this Court's March 19, 2010 Order adopting the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations dismissing the case (even though Plaintiffs were afforded leave to amend certain of their claims). 1

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 27 28

Third, Plaintiffs object to a non-Article III Judge adjudicating the subject Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiffs appear to misapprehend the fact that, by issuing its March 19, 2010 Order adopting the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations, this Court has already engaged in a de novo review of the legal conclusions reached by the magistrate judge. Given that review, Plaintiffs' first and third requests are DENIED inasmuch as the requested review by the undersigned, as an Article III judge of this Court, has already taken place. Moreover, Plaintiffs' second request, which appears to seek reconsideration of this Court's order approving the magistrate judge's findings, is also DENIED, without prejudice, for failure to file a noticed motion complying with the requirements of Eastern District Local Rule 230(j). Plaintiff's so-called Motion

(Docket No. 79) is accordingly DENIED at this time in its entirety. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 13, 2010

_____________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2