Saucedo

(PS) Bey v. Saucedo

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 8, 20202:19-cv-02113California381 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 NOBLE GERONIMO MUSA BEY, No. 2:19-cv-2113-TLN-DB Plaintiff, v. ORDER JESSE SAUCEDO, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Noble Geronimo Musa Bey (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se in the above- entitled action. 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 April 2, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. (ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff has filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations. (ECF No. 4.) This Court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). As 27 …

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.