Maxwell v. Holder

Full title: VALENTINA S. MAXWELL, Plaintiff, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., et al.…

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Jul 20, 2015

2:14-cv-2772 TLN AC (E.D. Cal. Jul. 20, 2015)

Opinion

VALENTINA S. MAXWELL, Plaintiff, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., et al., Defendants. No. 2:14-cv-2772 TLN AC United States District Court, E.D. California. July 20, 2015

          ORDER

          TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.

         Plaintiff is proceeding in this action in pro per. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21).

         On May 15, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 32.) Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations on May 26, 2015. (ECF No. 36.) Defendants filed a response to the objections to the findings and recommendations on May 28, 2015. (ECF No. 37.)

         In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed May 15, 2015 are adopted in full;

2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 19), is granted and Plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed without prejudice;

3. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and request for judicial notice, (ECF No. 22), is denied as moot.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.