From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Logan v. Ross

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California
Mar 12, 2010
ED CV 08-00637 DSF (RZ) (C.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2010)

Opinion


JOE LOGAN, Plaintiff, v. SGT. S.L. ROSS, ET AL., Defendants. No. ED CV 08-00637 DSF (RZ). United States District Court, C.D. California. March 12, 2010.

          ORDER ACCEPTING AMENDED FIRST INTERIM REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

          DALE S. FISCHER, District Judge.

         The Court has reviewed the file in this matter, and has read and reviewed the Amended First Interim Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which Plaintiff has objected. The Court accepts the findings and recommendations in the Report, with the following clarification.

         The undersigned agrees with the recommendation that all Doe defendants should be dismissed from the action for Plaintiff's failure to serve them for an extended period of time. An additional reason for dismissing Does 1 and 2 from the action, as set out in the Amended First Interim Report, is that (a) Does 1 and 2 were targeted solely in Claim 1, and (b) anyone targeted in Claim 1 is entitled to qualified immunity.

         The First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED. Plaintiff shall have leave to amend, as set forth in the Amended First Interim Report and shall not have leave to amend as to any Does, as further clarified above, including Does 1 and 2. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint shall be filed within 30 days. If Plaintiff fails to file a timely Second Amended Complaint, then the action may be dismissed for failure to prosecute.


Summaries of

Logan v. Ross

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California
Mar 12, 2010
ED CV 08-00637 DSF (RZ) (C.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2010)
Case details for

Logan v. Ross

Case Details

Full title:JOE LOGAN, Plaintiff, v. SGT. S.L. ROSS, ET AL., Defendants.

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

Date published: Mar 12, 2010

Citations

ED CV 08-00637 DSF (RZ) (C.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2010)