Olson v. Hornbrook Community Services District, et al.

Filing 21

ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 1/2/2019 REJECTING the 17 Findings and Recommendations. Plaintiff's 13 Request for Review and Acceptance of Amended Complaint is GRANTED. Plaintiff's 20 Request for Reconsid eration is DENIED as moot. Plaintiff's 14 Second Amended Complaint is deemed properly filed and Defendants are ordered to respond to that pleading not later than twenty (20) days after the date this Order is electronically filed. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KIMBERLY R. OLSON,

12
13
14
15
16

No. 2:15-cv-00646-MCE-DMC

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

HORNBROOK COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT, et al.,
Defendants.

17
18
19
20

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. The matter was
referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules.
On August 31, 2018, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations

21

herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file

22

objections within a specified time. Timely objections to the findings and recommendations have

23

been filed. In addition, Plaintiff filed a document captioned “Request for Reconsideration of

24

Findings and Recommendations Concerning Second Amended Complaint” (ECF No. 20), which

25

the court construes as additional objections.

26

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

27

304(f), this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

28

entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations are not supported by the record and
1

1

by proper analysis. Plaintiff should not have been prohibited from filing a complaint in excess of

2

25 pages, particularly given the number of defendants in this matter, as well as the volume of

3

claims being asserted. Moreover, Plaintiff properly asked for permission to file an expanded

4

pleading in any event concurrently with her submission of the Second Amended Complaint. ECF

5

No. 13.

6

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

7

1.

The findings and recommendations filed August 31, 2018, are rejected;

8

2.

Plaintiff’s Request for Review and Acceptance of Amended Complaint

9

(ECF No. 13) is GRANTED;

10

3.

Plaintiff’s Request for Reconsideration (ECF No. 20) is DENIED as moot;

11

3.

Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 14) is deemed properly

12

filed and Defendants are ordered to respond to that pleading not later than twenty (20) days after

13

the date this Order is electronically filed.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 2, 2019

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2