(PS)Bruzzone v. Intel Corporation

Filing 20

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/10/2022 ADOPTING 17 Findings and Recommendations in full, GRANTING 6 Motion to Dismiss, DISMISSING 1 Complaint without leave to amend, and GRANTING 7 Motion to Declare Plaintiff a Vexati ous Litigant. Plaintiff is DECLARED a vexatious litigant and must submit for pre-filing review any pro se complaint to be filed in the Eastern District of California against Intel Corporation. The Court ISSUES the following pre-filing order: Any futu re filing of any kind by Plaintiff in the US District Court for the Eastern District of California shall contain the following words in all capital letters at the top of the front page: "PLAINTIFF HAS BEEN DECLARED A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT IN CASE N O. 2:21-cv-1539-TLN-CKD-PS." If a proposed filing does not contain that heading, the Clerk of the Court shall lodge (not file) it and the Court shall not review it; any incomplete filings shall be returned to Plaintiff without further action of the Court. If Plaintiff submits an action as a self-represented Plaintiff accompanied by the required heading, then the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to open the matter as a miscellaneous case to be considered by the General Duty Judge of this Court . The Duty Judge shall determine whether the case constitutes pro se litigation by Plaintiff against Intel; if so, then the Duty Judge shall dismiss the action without comment pursuant to this pre-filing order. If the complaint does not constitute pr o se litigation by Plaintiff against Intel, then the Duty Judge shall order the Clerk to file the complaint as normal. These requirements shall be waived if Plaintiff's filing is made on his behalf by a licensed attorney at law in good standing who signs the filing as the attorney of record for Plaintiff. CASE CLOSED. (Huang, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL A. BRUZZONE,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:21-cv-01539-TLN-CKD

v.

ORDER

INTEL CORPORATION,

15

Defendant.

16
This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302.

17
18

On November 15, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which

19

contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within

20

fourteen days. (ECF No. 17.) Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations and

21

defendant filed a response to the objections. (ECF Nos. 18, 19.)
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

22
23

Court has conducted a review of this case. Having carefully reviewed this matter, the Court finds

24

the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

25

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

26

1. The findings and recommendations filed November 15, 2021 (ECF No. 17) are
adopted in full;

27
28

///
1

2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 6) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s complaint is

1
2

dismissed without leave to amend;
3. Defendant’s motion to declare Plaintiff a vexatious litigant (ECF No. 7) is

3
4

GRANTED;

5

4. Plaintiff is declared a vexatious litigant and must submit for pre-filing review any pro

6

se complaint to be filed in the Eastern District of California against Intel Corporation;

7

5. The Court ISSUES the following pre-filing order:

8

a. Any future filing of any kind by Plaintiff in the United States District Court for

9

the Eastern District of California shall contain the following words in all capital

10

letters at the top of the front page: “PLAINTIFF HAS BEEN DECLARED A

11

VEXATIOUS LITIGANT IN CASE NO. 2:21-cv-1539-TLN–CKD-PS.” If a

12

proposed filing does not contain that heading, the Clerk of the Court shall lodge

13

(not file) it and the Court shall not review it; any incomplete filings shall be

14

returned to Plaintiff without further action of the Court;

15

b. If Plaintiff submits an action as a self-represented Plaintiff accompanied by the

16

required heading, then the Clerk of the Court is directed to open the matter as a

17

miscellaneous case to be considered by the General Duty Judge of this Court. The

18

Duty Judge shall determine whether the case constitutes pro se litigation by

19

Plaintiff against Intel; if so, then the Duty Judge shall dismiss the action without

20

comment pursuant to this pre-filing order. If the complaint does not constitute pro

21

se litigation by Plaintiff against Intel, then the Duty Judge shall order the Clerk to

22

file the complaint as normal;

23

c. The requirements of subparagraphs (a) and (b) shall be waived if Plaintiff’s

24

filing is made on his behalf by a licensed attorney at law in good standing who

25

signs the filing as the attorney of record for Plaintiff; and

26

6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

27

///

28

///
2

1

DATED: January 10, 2022

2
3
4
5

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3