Peter Garcia v. Ralph Diaz, No. 5:2020cv02564 - Document 28 (C.D. Cal. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha. IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that: 2. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND; 3 . Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint will PROCEED solely with respect to the following claims against Defendants Bonadle, Nuez, Frias, Vance, Montgomery, Strippling, Messerli, Wilson, Rossolio, Sanders, Wright, Landry, Allen, Kuntz, and Doe Defendants 19: [SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.] for Report and Recommendation (Issued), 27 (es)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Peter Garcia v. Ralph Diaz Doc. 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. RALPH DIAZ, et al., ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Defendants. 16 17 Case No. 5:20-cv-02564-FLA (MAAx) PETER GARCIA, Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the court has reviewed the Second Amended 18 Complaint, the other records on file herein, and the Report and Recommendation of 19 the United States Magistrate Judge. The time for filing objections has expired and 20 no objections have been made. The court accepts the findings and 21 recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. 22 IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that: 23 1. ACCEPTED; 24 25 The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is 2. Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITH 26 PREJUDICE and WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND with respect to: 27 a. 28 Defendants Jeffrey Macomber, Kenneth J. Pogue, Anthony Carter, Steven Escobar, P. Birdsong, and Chelsea Armenta; Dockets.Justia.com 1 b. Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim against 2 Defendants Macomber, Pogue, Carter, Escobar, Birdsong, and 3 Armenta; 4 c. First Amendment right to petition claim; and 5 d. First Amendment retaliation claim. 6 3. Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint will PROCEED solely with 7 respect to the following claims against Defendants Bonadle, Nuñez, 8 Frias, Vance, Montgomery, Strippling, Messerli, Wilson, Rossolio, 9 Sanders, Wright, Landry, Allen, Kuntz, and Doe Defendants 1–9: 10 a. Fourth Amendment search and seizure claim; 11 b. Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim; 12 c. California Civil Code § 52.1, Tom Bane Civil Rights Act; and 13 d. California Civil Code § 51.7, Ralph Civil Rights Act. 14 15 16 DATED: October 19, 2021 FERNANDO L. AENLLE-ROCHA United States District Judge 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.
