(PS) Maxwell v. Holder, et al, No. 2:2014cv02772 - Document 55 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 7/25/18 Recommending that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 17 be denied. These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to U.S. District Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections to these F&Rs due within (10) days. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS) Maxwell v. Holder, et al Doc. 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VALENTINA S. MAXWELL, 12 No. 2:14-cv-02772 TLN AC (PS) Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 This case is before the court on remand from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth 17 18 Circuit. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, and the action was accordingly referred to the undersigned 19 for pre-trial matters by E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(21). This is an immigration case in which plaintiff alleges delay in the adjudication of her 20 21 naturalization application under 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b). ECF No. 1 at 1. On March 2, 2015, 22 defendants brought a motion to dismiss on three grounds: (1) lack of jurisdiction; (2) mootness in 23 light of pending removal proceedings; and (3) failure to state a claim upon which relief can be 24 granted under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). ECF No. 17 at 3-12. On May 15, 2015, the undersigned 25 issued Findings and Recommendations disagreeing with defendants as to the jurisdiction and 26 mootness issues, but recommending dismissal for failure to state a claim. ECF No. 32. The 27 district judge adopted the Findings and Recommendations in full. ECF No. 44. 28 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 On June 15, 2018, the Ninth Circuit issued a memorandum decision reversing this court’s 2 dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6). ECF No. 50. The case was remanded for further proceedings. Id. 3 In light of the Ninth Circuit’s mandate regarding the 12(b)(6) issue, and this court’s previous 4 determination that it has jurisdiction and that the case is not moot (or was not moot at the time the 5 motion was made), the defendant’s 2015 motion to dismiss must now be DENIED. Therefore, IT 6 IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 17) be denied. 7 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 8 assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten (10) days 9 after being served with these findings and recommendations, defendant may file written 10 objections with the court. Such document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 11 Findings and Recommendations.” Local Rule 304(d). Defendant is advised that failure to file 12 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 13 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 14 DATED: July 25, 2018. 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.
