Harold J. Rucker, Jr. v. CSAA Insurance Exchange, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 HAROLD J. RUCKER, JR., No. 2:25-cv-2503 DAD AC PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION CSAA INSURANCE EXCHANGE, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The action was accordingly referred to the undersigned for pretrial matters by E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(21). On September 22, 2025, the court issued an order to show cause why this case should not be dismissed as barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. ECF No. 7. Plaintiff was cautioned that failure to respond would result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. Plaintiff has not responded. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth by the District Judge in his order denying plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order (ECF No. 5), it is RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed as barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 26 …