Opinion
2:22-cv-01734-DAD-KJN
09-24-2023
JEAN MARC VAN DEN HEUVEL, Plaintiff, v. EL DORADO COUNTY TRANSIT, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS, AND DISMISSING THIS ACTION (DOC. NOS. 11, 18)
DALE A. DROZD UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Plaintiff Jean Marc Van den Heuvel, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, initiated this civil action on September 30, 2022. (Doc. No. 1.) This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On August 31, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's first amended complaint (Doc. No. 11) be granted and that this action be dismissed with prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to state a cognizable claim. (Doc. No. 18.) Specifically, the magistrate judge concluded that granting plaintiff leave to amend his sole claim brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) would be futile because “plaintiff did receive transportation services-just not the particular drop-off point he requested,” and plaintiff cannot state a cognizable ADA claim based on defendant's alleged refusal to alter a fixed route transit. (Id. at 1, 3-4.) Those pending findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 4.) To date, no objections to the pending findings and recommendations have been filed, and the time in which to do so has now passed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, 1. The findings and recommendations issued on August 31, 2023 (Doc. No. 18) are adopted in full;
2. This action is dismissed due to plaintiff's failure to state a cognizable claim; and
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.