(PC) Harding v. Sacramento County Sheriff Dept et al, No. 2:2021cv00964 - Document 14 (E.D. Cal. 2022)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 6/1/2022 ADOPTING in FULL 11 Findings and Recommendations. DISMISSED Second Amended Complaint 9 without further leave to amend, and the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. CASE CLOSED (Reader, L)

Download PDF
(PC) Harding v. Sacramento County Sheriff Dept et al Doc. 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BRENT LEE HARDING, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:21-cv-00964-TLN-CKD Plaintiff, ORDER v. SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendant. 16 17 18 Plaintiff, a county prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking 19 relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 20 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On March 23, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 22 which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the 23 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 11.) Plaintiff has 24 filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 12.) 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 26 Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 27 Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 28 analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed March 23, 2022, (ECF No. 11), are adopted 3 4 5 6 7 in full; 2. Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint, (ECF No. 9), is DISMISSED without further leave to amend; and 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. DATED: June 1, 2022 8 9 10 11 Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge 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.