(PC) Pollard v. Shasta Superior, et al, No. 2:2009cv03435 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 4/6/2010 ORDERING that the 2/16/10 findings and recommendations are VACATED; and RECOMMENDING that the 15 motion to dismiss be granted and this action be dismissd pursuant to F.R. Civ. P. 41 (a). Referred to Judge John A. Mendez; Objections to F&R due w/in 21 days.(Yin, K)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Pollard v. Shasta Superior, et al Doc. 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENNETH B. POLLARD, III, Plaintiff, 11 12 13 14 15 No. 2:09-cv-3435 JAM KJN P vs. SHASTA SUPERIOR COURT, et al., Defendants. ORDER & FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / 16 Plaintiff, a county jail inmate proceeding without counsel, seeks relief pursuant to 17 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 16, 2010, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations 18 that this action should be dismissed and plaintiff’s requests for injunctive relief and his motion 19 for removal be denied. Plaintiff was granted twenty-one days to file objections. 20 On March 18, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss his action. 21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the February 16, 2010 findings and 22 23 24 recommendations (Dkt. No. 14) are vacated. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 15) be granted and this action be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a). 25 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 26 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 2 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 3 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 4 objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 5 parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 6 appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 7 DATED: April 6, 2010 8 9 10 _____________________________________ KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 poll3435.dis 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.
