(PC)Trehearne v. Amador County, No. 2:2022cv00254 - Document 21 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 12/20/2023 ADOPTING in FULL 20 Findings and Recommendations. This action is DISMISSED pursuant to FRCP 41(b). DISMISSED as MOOT 11 Motion to Dismiss. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. CASE CLOSED(Reader, L)

Download PDF
(PC)Trehearne v. Amador County Doc. 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 THOMAS TREHEARNE, 12 No. 2:22-cv-00254-TLN-DB Plaintiff, 13 ORDER v. 14 AMADOR COUNTY, 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a former1 county inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil 17 18 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On October 25, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 21 which were served on Plaintiff, and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. (ECF No. 20.) Plaintiff 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Review of the Amador County inmate locator website indicates that plaintiff is no longer in custody. The Court may take judicial notice of information stored on Amador County’s inmate locator website. See In re Yahoo Mail Litig., 7 F. Supp. 3d 1016, 1024 (N.D. Cal. 2014) (a court may take judicial notice of information on “publicly accessible websites” not subject to reasonable dispute); Louis v. McCormick Schmick Restaurant Corp., 460 F. Supp. 2d 1153, 1155 fn. 4 (C.D. Cal. 2006) (a court may take judicial notice of state agency records). Plaintiff has not updated his address with the Court as required by Eastern District of California Local Rule 182(f). 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The Court reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 25, 2023 (ECF No. 20) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 7 2. This action is DISMISSED pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b); 8 3. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 11) is DISMISSED as moot; and 9 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 10 Date: December 20, 2023 11 12 Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge 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.