(PS) Ingram v. Grant Joint Union High School District, et al, No. 2:2008cv02490 - Document 75 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 9/9/10 ORDERING that the findings and recommendations 73 are adopted in full; Defendants' 9/21/09 motion to strike portions of plaintiff's second amended complaint 54 is granted and the spec ified portions of the pleading are deemed stricken; Defendants' 9/21/09 motion to dismiss and for more definite statement 56 is(a) granted as to dismissal of all claims against Grant Joint Union High School District Police Services Division; ( b) granted as to dismissal of all claims alleged under the First, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments;(c) denied as to dismissal of the claims alleged against defendants Breck and Scott under the Fourth Amendment; (d) denied as to requiring a more definite statement; and Defendants' 9/21/09 motion for sanctions 58 is denied. (Becknal, R)
Download PDF
(PS) Ingram v. Grant Joint Union High School District, et al Doc. 75 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CHADERICK A. INGRAM, Plaintiff, 11 vs. 12 13 No. CIV S-08-2490 FCD DAD PS GRANT JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., ORDER 14 Defendants. / 15 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se with the above-entitled action. The matter was 16 17 referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). 18 On August 16, 2010, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 19 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice that any objections to the 20 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days after service of the findings 21 and recommendations. Defendants have filed timely objections. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 22 23 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the 24 entire 25 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 26 proper analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed August 16, 2010 (Doc. No. 73) are 3 4 adopted in full; 2. Defendants’ September 21, 2009 motion to strike portions of plaintiff’s second 5 amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) (Doc. No. 54) is granted 6 and the specified portions of the pleading are deemed stricken; 7 8 9 10 11 12 3. Defendants’ September 21, 2009 motion to dismiss and for more definite statement (Doc. No. 56) is (a) granted as to dismissal of all claims against Grant Joint Union High School District Police Services Division; (b) granted as to dismissal of all claims alleged under the First, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments; 13 (c) denied as to dismissal of the claims alleged against 14 defendants Breck and Scott under the Fourth Amendment; 15 (d) denied as to requiring a more definite statement; and 16 17 4. Defendants’ September 21, 2009 motion for sanctions (Doc. No. 58) is denied. DATED: September 9, 2010. 18 19 20 _______________________________________ FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 2