(PC) Rotroff v. Robinson et al, No. 1:2006cv01419 - Document 70 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS Recommending 69 Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss be Granted, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 6/1/11. Referred to Judge O'Neill; 14-Day Deadline. (Verduzco, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Rotroff v. Robinson et al Doc. 70 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 DENIS K. ROTROFF, CASE NO. 1:06-CV-01419-LJO-DLB PC 9 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISMISS BE GRANTED 10 v. 11 JIM ROBINSON, et al., (DOC. 69) 12 Defendants. OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN (14) DAYS 13 14 15 / 16 17 18 Findings And Recommendations Plaintiff Denis K. Rotroff (“Plaintiff”) is a civil detainee in the custody of the California 19 Department of Mental Health. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 20 rights action. This action was proceeding against Defendants Ben McClain, Jim Robinson, G. 21 Dieke, Charles Rabout, Sharon Rogers, and Mendoza. On February 25, 2011, notice of 22 settlement was filed. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss this action, filed 23 April 15, 2011. Doc. 69. The Defendants have filed no response. 24 The parties’ settlement agreement was as follows: Defendants paid Plaintiff a specified 25 amount of money, and Plaintiff agreed to dismiss this action. The record reflects that Defendants 26 have complied with the terms of the settlement. See Defs.’ Response, Doc. 59. The Court 27 construes Defendants’ non-response as a waiver of opposition to Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss. 28 There does not appear to be any reason why this action should not be closed. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 2 1. Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss, filed April 15, 2011, be GRANTED; 3 2. This action be dismissed with prejudice; and 4 3. The parties are to bear their own attorney’s fees and costs. 5 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 6 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen 7 (14) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may file 8 written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 9 Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections 10 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. 11 Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir. 1991). 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: 77e0d6 June 1, 2011 /s/ Dennis L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
