(PS) Hubbard v. Winfrey, No. 2:2007cv02586 - Document 11 (E.D. Cal. 2009)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 2/10/09 ORDERING that subject to the clarification noted above, 10 the findings and recommendations filed October 23, 2008, are adopted in full. This action is DISMISSED. CASE CLOSED. (Duong, D)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS) Hubbard v. Winfrey Doc. 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MYRNA HUBBARD, 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-2586 LKK KJM PS vs. OPRAH WINFREY, Defendant. ORDER / Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled actions. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21). On October 23, 2008, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 19 herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections 20 to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Plaintiff has not filed 21 objections to the findings and recommendations. 22 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 23 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis, subject to one exception. The 24 magistrate cites Hinshon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984) and Conley v. Gibson, 355 25 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957) for the statement that a complaint should only be dismissed for failure to 26 state a claim upon which relief may be granted “if it appears byeond doubt that plaintiff can 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 prove no set of facts in support of the claim or claims that would entitle him to relief.” 2 Magistrate’s Findings and Recommendations of October 23, 2008 at 2. The Supreme Court 3 repudiated this standard in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). However, the 4 Twombly standard raises the bar for plaintiffs, and this court agrees that plaintiff failed to clear 5 even the lower, "no set of facts" bar.. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 7 1. Subject to the clarification noted above, the findings and recommendations filed October 23, 2008, are adopted in full; and 8 9 2. This action is dismissed. DATED: February 10, 2009. 10 11 12 13 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.
