From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Price v. City of Corning

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
Jul 8, 2014
No. 1:13-cv-01730-CL (D. Or. Jul. 8, 2014)

Opinion

No. 1:13-cv-01730-CL

07-08-2014

GARY D. PRICE, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CORNING, CALIFORNIA, Defendant.


ORDER

PANNER, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Findings and Recommendation (#44), and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Plaintiff filed objections and I have reviewed the file of this case de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981).

I find no error. Plaintiff's complaint does not meet the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and it does not appear that further amendment could cure the deficiencies. The case is DISMISSED with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

__________

OWEN M. PANNER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Price v. City of Corning

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
Jul 8, 2014
No. 1:13-cv-01730-CL (D. Or. Jul. 8, 2014)
Case details for

Price v. City of Corning

Case Details

Full title:GARY D. PRICE, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CORNING, CALIFORNIA, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION

Date published: Jul 8, 2014

Citations

No. 1:13-cv-01730-CL (D. Or. Jul. 8, 2014)