(PS) Velez v. Luong et al, No. 2:2019cv02410 - Document 11 (E.D. Cal. 2020)

Court Description: ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 4/15/20 DENYING 7 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice to renewal as having been rendered moot and RECOMMENDING that defendant Harry Luong be dismissed from this action. F&R referred to District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections to F&R due within thirty days. (Kaminski, H)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE VELEZ, No. 2:19-cv-2410 KJM DB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. HARRY LUONG, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff Jose Velez is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was, therefore, 19 referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 20 (ECF No. 29.) On January 29, 2020, defendant Ramon Soltero filed an answer. (ECF No. 4.) 21 On February 6, 2020, defendant Harry Luong filed a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 7.) The 22 motion to dismiss is noticed for hearing before the undersigned on May 8, 2020. (ECF No. 10.) 23 On March 5, 2020, the undersigned issued an order to show cause due to plaintiff’s failure 24 to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendant’s motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 25 8.) On March 6, 2020, plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of defendant Harry Luong. 26 (ECF No. 9.) 27 //// 28 //// 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Defendant’s February 6, 2020 motion to dismiss (ECF No. 7) is denied without 3 prejudice to renewal as having been rendered moot; and 4 2. The May 8, 2020 hearing of defendant’s motion to dismiss is vacated. 5 Also, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that defendant Harry Luong be dismissed from 6 7 this action. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 8 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within thirty days after 9 being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with 10 the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to 11 Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections shall be served 12 and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure 13 to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s 14 order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 15 Dated: April 15, 2020 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 DLB:6 DB/orders/orders.pro se/velez2410.vol.dism.f&rs 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.