Opinion
CV 22-00594-MEMF (AS)
09-15-2023
EDUARDO ZARCO, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, et, al., Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMNEDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
MAAME EWUSI-MENSAH FRIMPONG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint filed by Plaintiff Eduardo Zarco (“Zarco”), all of the records herein, and the Report and Recommendation of a United States Magistrate Judge. After having made a de novo determination of the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which Objections were directed, the Court concurs with and accepts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. In sum, Zarco's Objections do not cause the Court to reconsider its decision to accept the Magistrate Judge's conclusions and recommendations.
On page 9 of the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge cites to Vaezi v. Stanley, No. CV 21-3027-JFW(Ex), 2021 WL 6103523, at *5 (C.D. Cal. July 28, 2021), among other citations, for the proposition that the CHP is not a “person” for the purposes of a § 1983 action. ECF No. 12 at 9. On January 10, 2023, after the Magistrate Judge issued this Report and Recommendation, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated and remanded the action in Vaezi on other grounds. Accordingly, the citation now should read Vaezi v. Stanley, No. CV 21-3027-JFW(Ex), 2021 WL 6103523, at *5 (C.D. Cal. July 28, 2021), vacated and remanded on other grounds by Vaezi, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Stanley, et al., Defendants-Appellees, No. 21-56273, 2023 WL 142651 (9th Cir. Jan. 10, 2023).
IT IS ORDERED that (1) Zarco's claims against Defendant California Highway Patrol and the individual defendants in their official capacity are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (2) Zarco's claims against Defendant Officer Baca are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (3) Zarco's claims premised on federal and state criminal statutes are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (4) Zarco's state law claims against Defendant R. Symons are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (5) Zarco's state law claims against Defendant J. Ornelas in his individual capacity are DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND; and (6) Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED.
As described in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, Zarco's Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against Defendants Symons and Ornelas, in their individual capacities may proceed. And as also described in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, if Zarco is able to show relief from compliance with California's Government Claims Act, his state law claims against Defendant Ornelas may also proceed.
If Zarco wishes to amend his state law claims against Defendant J. Ornelas in his individual capacity, Zarco is ORDERED to file a First Amended Complaint consistent with this Order and the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation no later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Order. Zarco is also reminded of the requirement that he serve his First Amended Complaint on Defendants Symons and Ornelas (or show waiver of service), as discussed in footnote 5 of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk serve copies of this Order and the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation on Plaintiff and counsel for Defendants.
RESOURCES FOR SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES
The Court appreciates that Zarco is proceeding pro se, i.e., without legal representation, and that-as described in his various filings-he has had great difficulty understanding the legal process. He is nonetheless are required to comply with Court orders, the Local Rules, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See C.D. Cal. L.R. 83-2.2.3. The Local Rules are available on the Court's website, http://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/court-procedures/local-rules.
Although the Court cannot provide legal advice to any party, including pro se litigants (parties who are not represented by a lawyer), there is a free “Pro Se Clinic” that can provide information and guidance about many aspects of civil litigation in this Court. Further information is below:
• Public Counsel runs a free Federal Pro Se Clinic where pro se litigants can get information and guidance. The Clinic is located at the Roybal Federal Building and Courthouse, 255 East Temple Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012 (note that the clinic may not be open for in-person appointments during the pandemic). Pro se litigants must call or submit an on-line application to request services as follows: on-line applications can be submitted at http://prose.cacd.uscourts.gov/los-angeles, or call (213) 385-2977, ext. 270.
• Public Counsel also has extensive resources for pro se litigants at its website located at https://publiccounsel.org/services/federal-court/.
• The Court is also informed that the LA Law Library, located across the street from the First Street Courthouse at 301 W. First Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012, also has extensive resources for pro se litigants. The LA Law Library can be reached via email at reference@lalawlibrary.org, or via telephone at (213) 785-2513.