Seidenfeld v. Rosales

Full title: LAURENCE SEIDENFELD, Plaintiff, v. MRS. ROSALES, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Mar 5, 2011

CV 10-7004 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 5, 2011)

Opinion

LAURENCE SEIDENFELD, Plaintiff, v. MRS. ROSALES, et al., Defendants. No. CV 10-7004 United States District Court, C.D. California. March 5, 2011

          ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

          PERCY ANDERSON, District Judge.

         Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the First Amended Complaint ("Complaint"), the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, Petitioner's "Response to Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation" ("Objections"), and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination.

         Plaintiff's Objections generally parrot and rehash the arguments made in his Complaint, and lack merit for the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation.

         Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) the Report and Recommendation is approved and adopted; (2) Judgment be entered dismissing this action with prejudice; and (3) the Clerk serve copies of this Order and the Judgment on the parties.