Lawson v. Tehama County et al

Filing 37

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/15/2018 ORDERING that 33 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED and the 26 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED; Plaintiff's First and Fifth Amendment claims and procedural Due Process claim are DISMISSED without leave to amend; Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment claim is DISMISSED with leave to amend within 20 days. (Fabillaran, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LEE LAWSON,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:17-cv-01276-TLN-GGH

v.

ORDER

TEHAMA COUNTY, et al.,

15

Defendants,

16
Plaintiff appears in this civil rights matter pro se. The matter was referred to a United

17
18

States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

19

On January 29, 2018, following a hearing, the magistrate judge filed findings and

20

recommendations herein, which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the

21

parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-

22

one days. (ECF No. 33.) Defendants have filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

23

(ECF No. 35.)
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.

Plaintiff’s First and Fifth Amendment claims are dismissed without leave to

2.

Plaintiff’s procedural Due Process claim is dismissed without leave to amend if,

3

amend;

4
5

indeed, one has been alleged at all;

6

3.

Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claim is dismissed with leave to amend, in

7

conformity with the discussion in the findings and recommendations, within 20 days of the date

8

this Order is filed; and1

9
10

4.

With respect to Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection and

substantive Due Process claims, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is DENIED.

11
12

Dated: March 15, 2018

13
14
15

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

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

1

Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint before Defendants filed their objections. (ECF No. 34.)

2