Rosendo Gonzalez, Jr. v. Butte County, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 24, 20252:25-cv-01491California333 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROSENDO GONZALEZ, Jr., Case No. 2:25-cv-1491-TLN-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER BUTTE COUNTY, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Rosendo Gonzalez, Jr. (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this action alleging claims relating to his April 5, 2025 arrest. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On October 14, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 11.) Plaintiff filed objections on November 3, 2025 (ECF No. 12), which the Court has considered. The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481…

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.