Bailey v. Enloe Medical Center
Filing
96
ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 5/23/2022 ADOPTING 75 Findings and Recommendations in full and GRANTING 62 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's 3rd, 4th, and 5th claims are DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiff's 7th claim based on statements made to Plaintiff's union representatives, California Employment Development Department, and California Health and Human Services Agency, is DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiff's 7th claim based on statements m ade to Cal Fire is DISMISSED with leave to amend. Plaintiff's 8th claim is DISMISSED with prejudice as duplicative. Within 30 days of the date of this order, Plaintiff shall either file a Third Amended Complaint to cure the defects identified as to his 7th claim based on statements made to Cal Fire, or elect to voluntarily dismiss the remainder of the 7th claim and proceed solely on the 1st, 2nd, and 6th claims for relief as alleged in 61 Second Amended Complaint. (Huang, H)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DAN BAILEY,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 2:18-CV-0055-KJM-DMC
v.
ORDER
ENLOE MEDICAL CENTER,
15
Defendant.
16
Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action for wrongful
17
18
termination. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Eastern
19
District of California local rules.
20
On February 23, 2021, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations,
21
which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections
22
within the time specified therein. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been
23
filed.
The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United
24
25
States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are
26
reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations
27
of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate]
28
/////
1
1
court . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be
2
supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
3
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
4
1.
The findings and recommendations filed February 23, 2021, are adopted in
6
2.
Defendant’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 62, is granted;
7
3.
Plaintiff’s third, fourth, and fifth claims are dismissed with prejudice;
8
4.
Plaintiff’s seventh claim based on statements made to Plaintiff’s union
5
full;
9
representatives, statements made to the California Employment Development Department, and
10
statements made to the California Health and Human Services Agency claim is dismissed with
11
prejudice;
12
13
5.
Plaintiff’s seventh claim based on statements made to Cal Fire is dismissed
with leave to amend;
14
6.
Plaintiff’s eighth claim is dismissed with prejudice as duplicative; and
15
7.
Within 30 days of the date of this order, Plaintiff shall:
16
17
(i) file a third amended complaint to cure the defects identified
in the findings and recommendations as to his seventh claim based on
statements made to Cal Fire;
18
19
20
or
(ii) elect to voluntarily dismiss the remainder of the seventh
claim and proceed solely on the first, second, and sixth claims for
relief as alleged in the second amended complaint.
21
22
DATED: May 23, 2022.
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?