Yee v. Sacramento County, Jail et al

Filing 41

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/27/18 ADOPTING in full the findings and recommendations filed 6/11/18 (ECF No. 36 ); DIRECTING the Clerk to issue process, Plaintiff shall complete and submit service documents to the USM within 30 days and file a Statement with the court re the submission of documents within 10 days thereafter. DIRECTING the USM to serve process on defendants Kathleen Fritzche, Harold Penny, and Corey Johnson, without prepayment of costs; DISMISSI NG without leave to amend the sixth amended complaint's Monell claims against the City of Sacramento, the County of Sacramento, and the Sacramento County Jail; and REFERRING this case back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial proceedings. (Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

VINCENT YEE,

12

No. 2:14-cv-2955 KJM DB PS
Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

ORDER

SACRAMENTO COUNTY JAIL, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se with the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a

17
18

United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c)(21).

19

On June 11, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were

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 fourteen days after service of the findings and

22

recommendations. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

23

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

24

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

25

findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.1

26

1

27
28

Although plaintiff objects to the Magistrate Judge’s characterization of the frequency of his
attempted Monell claims, see ECF No. 37 at 2, these contentions do not affect the court’s
analysis. Throughout his seven complaints, plaintiff has consistently intimated, without expressly
stating, a Monell claim; and with each new complaint, the court has evaluated the viability of a
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed June 11, 2018 (ECF No. 36) are adopted in

3

full.

4

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to issue process and to send plaintiff an instruction

5

sheet for service of process by the United States Marshal, three USM-285 forms, a summons

6

form, and an endorsed copy of plaintiff’s sixth amended complaint filed November 22, 2017.

7

(ECF No. 35.)

8
9

3. Within thirty (30) days of this order, plaintiff shall submit to the United States Marshal
three properly completed USM-285 forms, three properly completed summons forms, and the

10

number of copies of the endorsed sixth amended complaint and of this order required by the

11

United States Marshal; the required documents shall be submitted directly to the United States

12

Marshal either by personal delivery or by mail to: United States Marshals Service, 501 I Street,

13

Suite 5600, Sacramento, CA 95814 (tel. [phone]).

14

4. Within ten (10) days after submitting the required materials to the United States

15

Marshals Service, plaintiff is ordered to file with this court a declaration stating the date on which

16

plaintiff submitted the required documents to the United States Marshal. Failure to file the

17

declaration in a timely manner may result in an order imposing appropriate sanctions.

18

5. Within thirty (30) days after receiving the necessary materials from plaintiff, the

19

United States Marshal is directed to serve process on defendants Kathleen Fritzche, Harold

20

Penny, and Corey Johnson, without prepayment of costs.

21
22

6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the United States
Marshal.

23

7. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to comply with this order may result in a

24

recommendation that this action be dismissed.

25

/////

26
27
28

Monell claim and provided plaintiff ample opportunity to correct deficiencies when necessary. In
light of these opportunities, the Magistrate Judge is justified in recommending dismissal without
leave to amend on the Monell claim.
2

1

8. The sixth amended complaint’s Monell claims against the City of Sacramento, the

2

County of Sacramento, and the Sacramento County Jail are dismissed without leave to amend and

3

those defendants are dismissed from this action.

4

9. This case is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial

5

proceedings.

6

DATED: September 27, 2018.

7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3