Moore v. White

Full title: MARIO MICHAEL KEITH MOORE, Plaintiff, v. SLADE WHITE, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Apr 28, 2015

2:15-cv-0475 KJM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2015)

Opinion

MARIO MICHAEL KEITH MOORE, Plaintiff, v. SLADE WHITE, et al., Defendants. No. 2:15-cv-0475 KJM CKD P United States District Court, E.D. California. April 28, 2015

          ORDER

          CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.

         On March 23, 2015, the undersigned magistrate judge recommended that this pro se prisoner action be dismissed for failure to state a claim, and directed the assignment of a district judge to review this recommendation. (ECF No. 4.) However, court records reveal that plaintiff has filed a notice of consent to the jurisdiction of the undersigned magistrate judge for all purposes. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c); Local Rule 302. (ECF No. 7.) As no defendants have been served, plaintiff is the only party to this action.

         Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 9.) He has also filed a request that the findings and recommendations be reconsidered. (ECF No. 10.) Having reviewed both these filings, the undersigned concludes there is no basis for modifying its prior conclusion that this action should be dismissed.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

         1. The Clerk of Court is directed to: (a) redesignate the undersigned's findings and recommendations filed March 23, 2015 as an order; and (b) withdraw the assignment of a district judge to this action; and

         2. For the reasons stated in this court's order filed March 23, 2015, this action is dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim.