Auten v. Cnty. of Calaveras

Full title: DONALD AUTEN, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF CALAVERAS, Defendant.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Feb 18, 2021

No. 1:20-cv-00329-NONE-EPG (PS) (E.D. Cal. Feb. 18, 2021)

Opinion

No. 1:20-cv-00329-NONE-EPG (PS)

02-18-2021

DONALD AUTEN, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF CALAVERAS, Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOITON TO DISMISS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

(Doc. Nos. 19, 28)

Plaintiff Donald Auten is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this disability discrimination complaint. This action proceeds on plaintiff's first amended complaint against defendant County of Calaveras for alleged violation of plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Defendant's motion to dismiss was referred to the assigned magistrate judge on November 30, 2020. (Doc. No. 27.)

On December 4, 2020, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that defendant's motion to dismiss be granted and that plaintiff be afforded leave to amend his complaint. (Doc. No. 28.) Those findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within twenty-one (21) days after service. (Id. at 9.) The magistrate judge granted an extra thirty days to ///// ///// object to the findings and recommendations on January 11, 2021. (Doc. No. 30.)¹ No objections have been filed, and the deadline to do so has expired.

1 Plaintiff's request for an extension of time did not actually seek additional time to file objections to the findings and recommendations; rather, he sought additional time to file an amended complaint. (Doc. No. 29.) As the magistrate judge correctly pointed out (Doc. No. 30), there was not at that time a deadline for plaintiff to amend his complaint because the magistrate judge's recommendation with regard to amendment had not yet been adopted. This order sets that deadline. --------

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 magistrate judge's findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly,

1. The findings and recommendations issued on December 4, 2020, (Doc. No. 28), are adopted in full;

2. Defendant's motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 19) is GRANTED;

3. Plaintiff's first amended complaint (Doc. No. 6) is dismissed; and

4. Plaintiff may file a second amended complaint within thirty days of the date of service of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 18 , 2021

/s/_________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE