(PC) Pollard v. Shasta Superior, et al, No. 2:2009cv03435 - Document 18 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 6/17/2010 ORDERING that The 16 findings and recommendations filed April 8, 2010, are adopted in full; Plaintiff's 15 voluntary motion to dismiss is GRANTED and this action is DISMISSED. CASE CLOSED. (Duong, D)

Download PDF
(PC) Pollard v. Shasta Superior, et al Doc. 18 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 vs. 12 13 No. 2:-09-cv-3435 JAM KJN P SHASTA SUPERIOR COURT, et al., Defendants. 14 ORDER / 15 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 16 17 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 18 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On April 8, 2010, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 19 20 which were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections to the findings and 21 recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Plaintiff’s copy of the findings and 22 recommendations was returned, and the findings and recommendations were re-served on 23 plaintiff’s new address on April 26, 2010. Twenty-one days from that date have now passed, and 24 plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 //// 26 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 3 ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed April 8, 2010, are adopted in full; 5 2. Plaintiff’s voluntary motion to dismiss is granted; and 6 3. This action is dismissed. 7 DATED: June 17, 2010 /s/ John A. Mendez U. S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 8 9 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.