(PS) Legardy v. McDonalds, No. 2:2023cv00182 - Document 4 (E.D. Cal. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/16/2023 ADOPTING 3 Findings and Recommendations in Full and DISMISSING this Action for Failure to State of Claim. CASE CLOSED. (Donati, J)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FLETCHER SHERMAN LEGARDY, 12 No. 2:23-cv-00182-DAD-AC Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 MCDONALDS, 15 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING THIS ACTION Defendant. (Doc. No. 3) 16 Plaintiff Fletcher Sherman Legardy is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 17 18 civil action. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 19 § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On February 1, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s complaint and 20 21 issued findings and recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed, without leave 22 to amend, due to plaintiff’s failure to state a cognizable claim upon which relief may be granted. 23 (Doc. No. 3.) The magistrate judge concluded that granting leave to amend would be futile 24 because plaintiff’s “complaint consists entirely of fanciful and delusional allegations with no 25 basis on law and no plausible supporting facts.” (Id. at 3.) Those pending findings and 26 recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were 27 to be filed within twenty-one (21) days after service. (Id. at 3–4.) To date, no objections to the 28 ///// 1 1 pending findings and recommendations have been filed, and the time in which to do so has now 2 passed. 3 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 4 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 5 findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 6 Accordingly, 7 1. 8 The findings and recommendations issued on February 1, 2023 (Doc. No. 3) are adopted in full; 9 2. This action is dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to state a claim; and 10 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 Dated: April 16, 2023 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.
