(PS) Whitsitt v. Hedy Holmes Staffing Services, et al, No. 2:2013cv00117 - Document 36 (E.D. Cal. 2014)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 12/4/2014 ORDERING that the 33 Findings and Recommendations are ADOPTED in full. WorkNet's 16 motion to dismiss is GRANTED as follows: Plaintiff's claim(s) against defendant Mark Sansone under the ADEA are DISMISSED with prejudice; Plaintiff's claims against WorkNet and non-ADEA claims against Sansone are DISMISSED with leave to amend. Plaintiff's claim(s) under the ADEA against "Kathleen" are DISMISSED sua sponte pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e), with prejudice. Plaintiff's remaining claims against the non-moving defendants are DISMISSED sua sponte pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e), with leave to amend. (Zignago, K.)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS) Whitsitt v. Hedy Holmes Staffing Services, et al Doc. 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM J WHITSITT, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:13-cv-0117 MCE AC v. ORDER HEDY HOLMES STAFFING SERVS., et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action in pro per. The matter was referred to a United States 18 Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). 19 On October 7, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 21 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. ECF No. 33. Plaintiff 22 has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. ECF No. 34. Defendants San Joaquin 23 County WorkNet and Mike Sansone have also filed an opposition to plaintiff’s objections. ECF 24 No. 35. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 26 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 27 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 7, 2014, are adopted in full; and 4 2. WorkNet’s June 30, 2014, motion to dismiss (ECF No. 16) is granted as follows: 5 a. Plaintiff’s claim(s) against defendant Mark Sansone under the ADEA are 6 dismissed with prejudice; 7 b. Plaintiff’s claims against WorkNet and non-ADEA claims against Sansone are 8 dismissed with leave to amend; 9 3. Plaintiff’s claim(s) under the ADEA against “Kathleen” are dismissed sua sponte 10 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e), with prejudice; and 11 4. Plaintiff’s remaining claims against the non-moving defendants are dismissed sua 12 sponte pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e), with leave to amend. 13 14 Dated: December 4, 2014 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.
