(PS) Legardy v. Subway Sandwich Shop ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FLETCHER LEGARDY, No. 2:23-cv-01897-DJC-CKD PS 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 SUBWAY SANDWICH SHOP, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On January 4, 2024, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations 18 (ECF No. 9), which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any 19 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen 20 days. No objections were filed. Accordingly, the court presumes that any findings of 21 fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The 22 magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley 23 Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 24 The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause 25 appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the findings and 26 recommendations in full. 27 Additionally, while Plaintiff has since filed an amended complaint, the time to 28 file such an amended complaint had already run. (See ECF Nos. 7, 11.) Moreover, the 1 | amended complaint filed by Plaintiff plainly fails to state a claim. The portion of the 2 || amended complaint that contains Plaintiff's own statements says, in its entirety: 3 In 1965 | started a company that brought my other companies to 4 Walstree stock broker. My company was E F Hutton. The store closed in 1982. In 2023 September 12 national public radio 5 announced they were looking for Subway sandwich shops owner. On September 25, 23 | filed with Federal Court in Sacramento, 6 California. The Court number is 2:23-cv-1897-DJC-CKD PS, also 7 also as a continuance [sic]. The Court said “! had to file with a corporation state.” Which brought me to you. Were [sic] going to 8 send a money order in the mail along with court papers. 9 | (ECF No. 10.) The remainder of the document is a partially completed application to 10 | proceed in forma pauperis for the United States District Court for the Northern District 11 | of Illinois and a money order sent to that same court. 12 Nothing in the above statement, the partially completed in forma pauperis 13 | application, or the money order states a claim or indicates an ability to do so. Thus, 14 | even if Plaintiff's amended complaint were permitted, dismissal with prejudice would 15 | still be warranted based on Plaintiff's failure to state a claim and the frivolous nature of 16 | the complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii). 17 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 18 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 9) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 19 2. Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim; and 20 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 21 29 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 | Dated: _February 13, 2024 “Danl . CDbnetto Hon. Daniel alabretta 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 25 26 27 28