Ransom v. Sacramento Housing Redeveloping Agency et al

Filing 26

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 2/12/2018 ADOPTING 25 Findings and Recommendations in full. Defendants' 15 motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety, with leave to amend within 30 days of the date of this Order. Defendants' 7 , 8 motions for a more definite statement are DENIED as moot. (Zignago, K.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CLINTON RANSOM, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:17-cv-01366-TLN-AC Plaintiff, v. ORDER SACRAMENTO HOUSING REDEVELOPING AGENCY, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 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). On December 14, 2017, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein, 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 25.) Neither 23 party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 25 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 26 ORDERED that: 27 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 14, 2017, are adopted in full; 28 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 15) is granted; 1 3. Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed in its entirety, with leave to amend within 30 days of 1 2 the date of this Order; 4. Defendants’ motions for a more definite statement (ECF Nos. 7 and 8) are denied as 3 4 moot. 5 6 Dated: 2/12/2018 7 8 9 Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?