(PC) Kern v. Sacramento Police Dept., No. 2:2023cv00560 - Document 15 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta on 11/17/23 ADOPTING 11 Findings and Recommendations in full, DISMISSING action per the abstention doctrine in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971); and DENYING 12 Request for forms as moot. CASE CLOSED (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES KERN, 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 No. 2:23-cv-00560-DJC-JDP (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On September 28, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be 1 1 supported by the record and by proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations filed September 28, 2023, are adopted 4 5 6 in full; 2. This action is dismissed pursuant to the abstention doctrine in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971); 7 3. Plaintiff’s request for forms (ECF No. 12) is DENIED as moot; and 8 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 9 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 17, 2023 Hon. Daniel J. Calabretta 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.