From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ricci v. Cnty. of Sacramento

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 24, 2020
No. 2:17-cv-2673-MCE-EFB PS (E.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2020)

Opinion

No. 2:17-cv-2673-MCE-EFB PS

03-24-2020

KRISTA RICCI, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, GIA SAVOY, DAVID CHERNOW, and Does 1 through 50, Inclusive, Defendants.


ORDER

On March 4, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. ECF No. 75. Plaintiff filed objections on March 18, 2020, and they were considered by the undersigned. ECF No. 76.

This Court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). As to any portion of the proposed findings of fact to which no objection has been made, the Court assumes its correctness and decides the motions on the applicable law. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).

The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed Findings and Recommendations in full. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed March 4, 2020 (ECF No. 75), are ADOPTED in full;

2. Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 52) is GRANTED and plaintiff's second amended complaint is DISMISSED without leave to amend;

3. Plaintiff's motions for leave to amend the complaint (ECF Nos. 51, 59, 66) are DENIED;

4. Defendants' motions to strike plaintiff's third and fourth amended complaints (ECF Nos. 53 & 65) are DENIED as moot;

5. Plaintiff's motions to vacate judgment (ECF Nos. 60, 73) are DENIED; and

6. The Clerk is directed to close the case.

IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: March 24, 2020

/s/_________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Ricci v. Cnty. of Sacramento

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 24, 2020
No. 2:17-cv-2673-MCE-EFB PS (E.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2020)
Case details for

Ricci v. Cnty. of Sacramento

Case Details

Full title:KRISTA RICCI, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Mar 24, 2020

Citations

No. 2:17-cv-2673-MCE-EFB PS (E.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2020)