Vincent

(PC) Mallett v. Vincent

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 12, 20242:23-cv-00394California373 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAWANE ARTHUR MALLETT, No. 2:23-cv-00394-DAD-DMC (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING

JOHN K. VINCENT, et al., THIS ACTION Defendants. (Doc. Nos. 2, 9) 16 Plaintiff Dawane Arthur Mallett, proceeding pro se, initiated this civil rights action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) on March 2, 2023. (Doc. No. 1.) This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On March 15, 2024, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed, without leave to amend, due to plaintiff’s failure to state a cognizable claim upon which relief may be granted. (Doc. No. 9.) Those findings and recommendations were served on plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days from the date of service. …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.