Macomber

(PS) Nible v. Macomber

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 30, 20242:24-cv-01259California418 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIAM LYLE NIBLE, No. 2:24-cv-01259-DJC-CSK (PS) Plaintiff, ORDER v. (ECF No. 18) JEFF MACOMBER, et al., Defendants. 16 On October 15, 2024, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations (ECF No. 18), which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. On October 29, 2024, Plaintiff filed a document titled “motion for reconsideration,” which the Court interprets as objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 22.) The motion was timely filed within the objection period, and in the motion, Plaintiff objects to the findings and recommendations. (Id. at 2.) Further, a motion for reconsideration filed before a ruling on the findings and recommendations is premature. Plaintiff’s objections have been considered by the court. This Court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed…

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.