(PS) Smith v. Lowe's HIW, Inc., No. 2:2013cv01713 - Document 33 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 5/12/2014 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 29 are ADOPTED in FULL; Defendant's 18 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; Defendant's 19 Motion to Strike is DENIED as MOOT; and Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to amend his complaint to assert defamation claims based exclusively on the allegedly defamatory statements including in his personal file. (Reader, L)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BRIEN EDWARD SMITH, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:13-cv-1713 WBS AC PS v. ORDER LOWE’S HIW, INC., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action in pro per. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). On April 14, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 20 were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 21 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Defendants have filed 22 objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 24 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 25 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 26 analysis. 27 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 28 1. The findings and recommendations filed April 14, 2014 are adopted in full; 1 1 2. Defendant’s January 30, 2014 motion to dismiss (ECF No. 18) is granted; 2 3. Defendant’s January 30, 2014 motion to strike (ECF No. 19) is denied as moot; and 3 4. Plaintiff is granted leave to amend his complaint to assert defamation claims based 4 exclusively on the allegedly defamatory statements included in his personal file. 5 Dated: May 12, 2014 6 7 8 9 10 /smit1713.806 11 12 13 14 15 16 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.