Wilburn v. Bratcher et al
Filing
59
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/30/2016 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 54 are ADOPTED in FULL; Plaintiff's motion 6 to remand is DENIED; Defendant Helena Gweon's 20 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED without leave to amend; Defendant Garren Bratcher's 15 motion to Strike is GRANTED with leave to amend as to Claims 4-13; Claims 1-3 are DISMISSED sua sponte as to Bratcher with leave to amend; Defendants City of Sacramento et al 5 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; Defendants County of Sacramento et al 10 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. (Reader, L)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
TERRENCE LAMAR WILBURN,
12
13
No. 2:15-cv-0699 TLN GGH
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
14
GARREN BRATCHER, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a
United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21).
19
On December 30, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein
20
which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to
21
the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 54.) Plaintiff
22
filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 55.) Defendants County of
23
Sacramento, Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department, Sheriff Scott Jones, Sacramento County
24
District Attorney’s Office, Sacramento County Public Defender’s Office, Deputy District
25
Attorney Laura West, Deputy Public Defender Teresa Huang, Deputy Public Defender Larry Yee,
26
and Deputy Hester filed a reply. (ECF No. 56.) Defendants City of Sacramento, Chief Samuel
27
D. Somers, Jr., Officer George Chargin, Officer Jose Yepes, Sergeant Sameer Sood, Detective
28
Bobby Daniels, Officer Jeremy Ratcliffe, and Detective Kevin Patton also filed a reply. (ECF
1
1
No. 57.)
2
The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be
3
supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY
4
ORDERED that:
5
1. The findings and recommendations filed December 30, 2015, are adopted in full;
6
2. Plaintiff’s motion to remand (ECF No. 6) is DENIED;
7
3. Defendant Helena Gweon’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 20) is GRANTED without
8
leave to amend;
4. Defendant Garren Bratcher’s (“Bratcher”) special anti-SLAPP Motion to Strike (ECF
9
10
No. 15) is GRANTED with leave to amend as to Claims Four through Thirteen;
11
12
13
5. Claims One through Three are dismissed sua sponte as to Bratcher with leave to
amend;
6. Defendants City of Sacramento, erroneously sued as Sacramento Police Department,
14
Samuel D. Somers, Jr. (“Officer Somers, Jr.”), George Chargin (“Officer Chargin”), erroneously
15
sued as G. Chargin, Jose Yepes (“Officer Yepes”), erroneously sued as J. Yepes, Sameer Sood
16
(“Officer Sood”), erroneously sued as S. Sood, Bobby Daniels (“Officer Daniels”), Jeremy
17
Ratcliffe (“Officer Ratcliffe”), erroneously sued as J. Ratcliffe, and Kevin Patton’s (“Officer
18
Patton”), erroneously sued as K. Patton (collectively “the City Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss
19
(ECF No. 5) is GRANTED per the following:
20
i. Claims One through Twelve are dismissed with leave to amend as to Officer
21
Somers, Jr., Officer Chargin, Officer Yepes, Office Sood, Officer Daniels, Officer Ratcliffe, and
22
Officer Patton;
23
ii. Claims One through Eight are dismissed with leave to amend, and Claims Nine
24
through Twelve without leave to amend, as to the City of Sacramento and the Sacramento Police
25
Department; and
26
iii. Claim Thirteen is dismissed without leave to amend;
27
7. Defendants County of Sacramento, Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department, Sheriff
28
Scott Jones (“Sheriff Jones”), Sacramento County District Attorney, Sacramento County Public
2
1
Defender’s Office, Deputy District Attorney Laura West (“D.A. West”), Deputy Public Defender
2
Teresa Huang (“P.D. Huang”), Deputy Public Defender Larry Yee (“P.D. Yee”), and Deputy
3
Hester’s (collectively “the County Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10) is GRANTED
4
per the following:
5
6
7
i. Claims One through Twelve are dismissed with leave to amend as to Sheriff
Jones, D.A. West, P.D. Huang, P.D. Yee, and Deputy Hester;
ii. Claims One through Eight are dismissed with leave to amend, and Claim Nine
8
through Twelve without leave to amend as to the County of Sacramento, Sacramento County
9
District Attorney, Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department, and Sacramento County Public
10
11
Defender’s Office, and
iii. Claim Thirteen is dismissed without leave to amend.
12
13
14
Dated: March 30, 2016
15
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?