From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Freeman v. Clark

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 7, 2022
1:21-cv-00611-JLT-CDB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2022)

Opinion

1:21-cv-00611-JLT-CDB (PC)

11-07-2022

LEROY FREEMAN, Plaintiff, v. KEN CLARK, et al., Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

(DOCS. 20 & 35)

ORDER DISMISSING DEFENDANTS CLARK AND BELL

On October 25, 2021, defendants Clark and Bell filed a motion to dismiss the claims against them in Freeman's First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 20). On September 22, 2022, Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered findings and recommendations, recommending that “Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. 20) be GRANTED,” and that “[d]efendants Clark and Bell be dismissed from this action, without further leave to amend.” (Doc. 35 at 15.) The deadline to file objections has passed, and neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In the First Amended Complaint, Freeman lists numerous other defendants who are allegedly responsible for violating Freeman's rights. (Doc. 16 at 2-3.) However, the only defendants who moved to dismiss were defendants Clark and Bell.

Freeman filed objections in a motion for reconsideration pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), which the Court overruled because Judge Grosjean did not enter an order suitable for reconsideration under Rule 72(a). (Doc. 37). Despite having an opportunity to do so (id. at 2), Freeman did not file objections to the findings and recommendations after his objections in the motion for reconsideration were overruled. Even if the Court were to consider these objections, none change the outcome.

According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on September 22, 2022 (Doc. 35), are ADOPTED IN FULL.
2. Defendant Clark and Bell's motion to dismiss (Doc. 20) is GRANTED.
3. Defendants Clark and Bell are dismissed from this action, without further leave to amend.
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate defendants Clark and Bell on the Court's docket.
5. This case is referred to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings.

Nothing in this order prevents Freeman from moving for leave to amend the complaint based on facts uncovered during discovery.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Freeman v. Clark

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 7, 2022
1:21-cv-00611-JLT-CDB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2022)
Case details for

Freeman v. Clark

Case Details

Full title:LEROY FREEMAN, Plaintiff, v. KEN CLARK, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Nov 7, 2022

Citations

1:21-cv-00611-JLT-CDB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2022)