Schneider v. Amador County et al

Filing 57

ORDER ADOPTING 52 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, in full, signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 3/27/2013. Defendants' 44 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff's 43 Second Amended Complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety with leave to amend only as set forther in Magistrate Judge Brennan's 52 Findings and Recommendations. Plaintiff is GRANTED 45 days from date of Order to file the Third Amended Complaint. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

CHRISTOPHER D. SCHNEIDER,
No. 2:10-cv-3242-GEB-EFB PS

11
12
13
14

Plaintiff,
vs.
AMADOR COUNTY; LINDA
VAN VLECK; JOHN HAHN;
SUSAN GRAIJILIVA; CARA
AUGUSTINE, and DOES 3-40,

15
16
17

Defendants.
__________________________________/

ORDER

On March 8, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

18

herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the

19

findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed objections on

20

March 22, 2013, and they were considered by the undersigned.

21

This court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to

22

which objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v.

23

Commodore Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920

24

(1982). As to any portion of the proposed findings of fact to which no objection has been made,

25

the court assumes its correctness and decides the motions on the applicable law. See Orand v.

26

United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are
1

1

reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir.

2

1983).

3

The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing,

4

concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed Findings and Recommendations in full.

5

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

6
7

1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed March 8, 2013, are
ADOPTED;

8

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 44, is granted;

9

3. Plaintiff’s second amended complaint is dismissed in its entirety, with leave to

10
11

amend only as set forth in the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations; and
4. Plaintiff is granted forty-five days from the date of this order to file a third

12

amended complaint as provided herein, so long as he can cure the defects identified in the

13

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations by truthfully alleging facts that are not

14

inconsistent with those contained in his previous complaints. In any third amended complaint,

15

plaintiff must plead against which defendant(s) he brings each cause of action, what each

16

defendant did to support relief under each respective cause of action, and what actual injuries

17

plaintiff has suffered as a result of each defendant’s conduct. The third amended complaint must

18

bear the docket number assigned to this case and must be labeled “Third Amended Complaint.”

19

Failure to timely file a third amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a

20

recommendation by the magistrate judge that this action be dismissed.

21

Dated: March 27, 2013

22
23
24

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
Senior United States District Judge

25
26
2