Hartline v. National University

Filing 55

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 2/3/2016 ADOPTING IN FULL 43 Findings and Recommendations; GRANTING 32 Motion to Dismiss with prejudice as to Counts 1 through 4, on statute of limitations grounds; GRANTING 32 Motion to Dis miss without prejudice as to Count 5; GRANTING the plaintiff LEAVE TO AMEND within 30 days; GRANTING 32 Motion to Dismiss with prejudice as to Counts 6 and 7 for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; GRANTING 32 Motion to Dismiss with preju dice as to Counts 8 through 11 for failure to state a claim; GRANTING 32 Motion to Dismiss with prejudice as to Count 12, insofar as it is based on Plaintiff's placement in student teaching jobs, on statute of limitation grounds; GRANTING 32 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice as to Count 12, insofar as it is based on alleged misrepresentations of Defendant's prior experience with disabled students; GRANTING the plaintiff LEAVE TO AMEND this claim within 30 days; GRANTING 32 Motion to Dismiss with prejudice as to Count 13. (Michel, G.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DOYLE DEAN HARTLINE,

12

No. 2:14-cv-0635 KJM AC (PS)

Plaintiff,

13

v.

ORDER

14

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY,

15

Defendant.

16
Plaintiff is proceeding in this action in pro per and in forma pauperis. The matter was

17
18

referred to a United States Magistrate Judge under Local Rule 302(c)(21).
On August 7, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were

19
20

served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings

21

and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No. 43. Defendant has filed

22

objections to the findings and recommendations. ECF No. 46. Plaintiff also has filed objections

23

to the findings and recommendations. ECF No. 50.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

24
25

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

26

court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper

27

analysis.

28

////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed August 7, 2015 are adopted in full; and

3

2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 32) is GRANTED as follows:

4
5
6

a. GRANTED with prejudice as to Counts 1 through 4 (ADA and RA claims), on
statute of limitations grounds;
b. GRANTED without prejudice, as to Count 5 (RA Claim), and plaintiff is

7

granted LEAVE TO AMEND within 30 days if he can plead facts establishing that he has

8

standing, as discussed in the findings and recommendations;

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

c. GRANTED with prejudice as to Counts 6 and 7 (Age Discrimination Act
claims), for failure to exhaust administrative remedies;
d. GRANTED with prejudice as to Counts 8 through 10 (“Due Process” claims),
for failure to state a claim;
e. GRANTED with prejudice as to Count 11 (“reckless endangerment” claim), for
failure to state a claim;
f. GRANTED with prejudice as to Count 12 (fraud claim), insofar as it is based on
plaintiff’s placement in student teaching jobs, on statute of limitations grounds;
g. GRANTED without prejudice as to Count 12 (fraud claim), insofar as it is

18

based on alleged misrepresentations of defendant’s prior experience with disabled students, and

19

plaintiff is granted LEAVE TO AMEND this claim within 30 days; and

20
21

h. GRANTED with prejudice as to Count 13 (personal injury claim).
DATED: February 3, 2016

22
23

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28
2