Todd v. Skrah et al

Filing 23

ORDER: Granting Motion to Dismiss 12 ; Adopting Findings and Recommendation 18 . Signed on 8/8/2017 by Judge Ann L. Aiken. A copy of this Order was mailed to pro se plaintiff John H. Todd. (ck)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION JOHN H. TODD, Case No. 1:17-cv-00738-CL ORDER Plaintiff, vs. FRANK SKRAH, GERALD WARREN, and KLAMATH COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, Defendants. AIKEN, Judge: On June 19, 2017, Magistrate Judge Clarke filed his Report and Recommendation ("R&R") (doc. 18), reconm1ending this Court dismiss with prejudice the complaint in this case on the grounds of claim preclusion and failure to state a claim. The R&R is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. I review de nova those pmtions of the R&R to which objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C); accord Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Holder v. Holder, 392 F.3d 1009, 1022 (9th Cir. 2004). I find no error in Judge Clarke's reasoning and agree that plaintiffs' claims must be dismissed. Page 1 - ORDER I therefore ADOPT Judge Clarke's R&R (doc. 18), subject to the caveat discussed below, and GRANT defendants' Motion to Dismiss (doc. 12). Judge Clarke recommended the imposition of a Rule 11 sanction against plaintiff: a prefiling order requiring review of all filings related to the removal of his cats from his home on June 15, 2015. Judge Clarke based that recommendation on the numerous lawsuits plaintiff has filed related to that incident, finding that plaintiff '"has clearly shown ... that, unless enjoined, he will continually attempt to renew his conflict' with Klamath County and its employees." R&R 11 (citing Wood v. Santa Barbara Chamber of Commerce, Inc., 705 F.2d 1515, 1525 (9th Cir. 1983)). In his objections to the R&R, plaintiff argues that any such pre-filing order is unnecessary because he is aware that any future claims arising from the June 15, 2015, seizure of his cats would be time-baned by the two-year statute of limitations. Although I agree with defendants that the sanctions recommended by Judge Clarke are "minimal and propmiionate to plaintiffs conduct," Defs.' Resp. Pl.'s Obj. R&R 5, I nonetheless decline to impose any sanction at this time. Instead, I take plaintiff at his word that he will respect the statute of limitations. IT IS SO ORDERED. Ann Aiken United States District Judge Page 2 - ORDER

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?