(PS) Bledsoe v. Facebook ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DONNELL BLEDSOE, No. 2:18-cv-2756-JAM-EFB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 FACEBOOK; MARK ZUCKERBERG, 15 Defendants. 16 17 On July 6, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 18 were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 19 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed objections on July 20, 20 2020, and they were considered by the undersigned. 21 This court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which 22 objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore 23 Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). As 24 to any portion of the proposed findings of fact to which no objection has been made, the court 25 assumes its correctness and decides the motions on the applicable law. See Orand v. United 26 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 27 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 28 ///// 1 The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, 2 concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed Findings and Recommendations in full. 3 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 4 1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed July 6, 2020, are adopted; 5 2. Plaintiff’s second amended complaint1 (ECF No. 7) is dismissed without leave to 6 amend; and 7 3. The Clerk is directed to close the case. 8 DATED: August 10, 2020 9 /s/ John A. Mendez____________ _____ 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 After the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations issued, plaintiff filed a third amended complaint. ECF No. 10. That complaint fails to remedy the second amended 27 complaint’s deficiencies, as set forth in the July 6, 2020 findings and recommendations, and does not state a state a claim for relief. Accordingly, there is no basis for allowing plaintiff to proceed 28 on his third amended complaint.