Opinion
EDCV 22-00452 AB (RAO)
03-26-2024
CATHERINE MENDEZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
ANDRE BIROTTE JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed Plaintiffs Catherine Mendez, Jamari Carter, and Chasity Doll's (“Plaintiffs”) Second Amended Complaint, Dkt. No. 13, Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment, Dkt. Nos. 32-34, 54, Defendants County of Riverside, Bodnar, Herwerk, Monges, and Rodriguez' (“Defendants”) Opposition, Dkt. No. 67, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, Dkt. Nos. 42-49, Plaintiffs' Opposition, Dkt. No. 63, Defendants' Reply, Dkt. No. 64, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (“Report”), issued February 13, 2024, Dkt. No. 70, Plaintiffs' Objections to the Report, Dkt. No. 72, and all of the other records and files herein. Further, the Court has made a de novo determination of those portions of the Report to which objections have been made. The Court is not persuaded by Plaintiffs' objections and hereby accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is denied, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is granted, and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.