From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cavalier v. County of San Diego

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, S.D. California
Jun 19, 2015
Civil 14cv1691 WQH (DHB) (S.D. Cal. Jun. 19, 2015)

Opinion


MARCOS CAVALIER, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO; WILLIAM GORE, Sheriff; SGT. KAMOSS, Deputy Sheriff; LT. MONTGOMERY, Lt. Sheriff; BABCOCK #0106, Deputy Sheriff; EDGE #4706, Deputy Sheriff; LUSARDI, #0159, Deputy Sheriff; MARTINEZ, #3156, Deputy Sheriff; SOBASZEK, #3209, Deputy Sheriff; TALAMANTEZ, # 6351, Deputy Sheriff; J. NAVARRO, #4431, Deputy Sheriff; SPALSBURY, #0508, Deputy Sheriff; and GONZALEZ #0109, Deputy Sheriff, Defendants. Civil No. 14cv1691 WQH (DHB) United States District Court, S.D. California. June 19, 2015

          ORDER

          WILLIAM Q. HAYES, District Judge.

         On September 25, 2014, Defendants Babcock, Edge, Gonzalez, Kamoss, Lusardi, Martinez, Montgomery, Navarro, Sobaszek, Spalsbury, and Talamantez ("Moving Defendants") filed the motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 18). The docket reflects that Plaintiff Marcos Cavalier did not file an opposition. On May 13, 2015, United States Magistrate Judge David H. Bartick issued the Report and Recommendation, recommending that the motion to dismiss be granted, that the Complaint be dismissed, that Plaintiff be granted leave to amend, and that Plaintiff be ordered to show cause for failure to serve Defendant County of San Diego and Defendant Gore. (ECF No. 24). The magistrate judge gave the parties until June 10, 2015 to file any objections to the Report and Recommendation. The docket reflects that no objections have been filed.

         IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 24) is ADOPTED as follows: page one to page fifteen, line nine, and page forty-four, line eighteen, through page forty-six. The motion to dismiss (ECF No. 18) is GRANTED. The Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice as to the Moving Defendants. Plaintiff is granted leave to amend. No later than forty-five (45) days from the date this Order is filed, Plaintiff may file a First Amended Complaint. If Plaintiff does not file a First Amended Complaint within that time, the Clerk of the Court shall close the case without further Order of the Court.

         This Order constitutes notice to Plaintiff that the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice with respect to Defendants County of San Diego and Gore forty-five (45) days from the date of this Order, unless, before that date, Plaintiff files proof that service of the Summons and Complaint has been effectuated upon Defendants County of San Diego and Gore.


Summaries of

Cavalier v. County of San Diego

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, S.D. California
Jun 19, 2015
Civil 14cv1691 WQH (DHB) (S.D. Cal. Jun. 19, 2015)
Case details for

Cavalier v. County of San Diego

Case Details

Full title:MARCOS CAVALIER, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO; WILLIAM GORE, Sheriff…

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

Date published: Jun 19, 2015

Citations

Civil 14cv1691 WQH (DHB) (S.D. Cal. Jun. 19, 2015)