(PC) Edwards v. County of Sacramento et al

Filing 40

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/24/2025 ADOPTING 31 Findings and Recommendations in full and DISMISSING the 29 Fourth Amended Complaint without leave to amend for Plaintiff's failure to state a claim. CASE CLOSED. (Deputy Clerk OML)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTHONY D. EDWARDS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. No. 2:22-cv-01854-TLN-SCR ORDER COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Anthony D. Edwards (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this 18 civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On October 16, 2024, 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. 31.) Plaintiff 23 filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 38.) 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. The Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 31) are ADOPTED IN FULL; and 3 2. The Fourth Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without leave to amend for Plaintiff’s 4 failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b)(1); and 5 3. The Clerk of Court shall close this case. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Date: January 24, 2025 8 9 10 11 ___________________________________ TROY L. NUNLEY CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?