(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)
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?