(PS) Taylor v. Department of the Air Force et al, No. 2:2008cv00869 - Document 45 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/26/10 ADOPTING 43 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in full; Defendant's 35 Motion for partial Dismissal of claims is GRANTED ; All claims alleged under the Family Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 USC 1981 and 1983, and the Fourteenth Amendment are DISMISSED with prejudice. This action shall proceed on the claims alleged in plaintiff's second amended complaint under Title VII and the Rehabilitation Act. (Donati, J)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS) Taylor v. Department of the Air Force et al Doc. 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KAREN M. TAYLOR, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. CIV S-08-0869 JAM DAD PS vs. MICHAEL B. DONLEY, Secretary of the United States Air Force, ORDER 14 Defendant. 15 / 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se with the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). 18 On March 10, 2010, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 19 herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any 20 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within seven days after being 21 served with the findings and recommendations. The seven-day period has expired, and no party 22 has filed an objection to the findings and recommendations. 23 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 24 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 25 ///// 26 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 10, 2010 (Doc. No. 43) are 3 adopted in full; 4 5 2. Defendant’s April 1, 2009 motion for partial dismissal of claims (Doc. No. 35) is granted; 6 3. All claims alleged under the Family Medical Leave Act, the Americans With 7 Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983, and the Fourteenth Amendment are dismissed with 8 prejudice; and 9 4. This action shall proceed on the claims alleged in plaintiff’s second amended 10 complaint under Title VII and the Rehabilitation Act. 11 DATED: March 26, 2010 12 13 /s/ John A. Mendez UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.
