(PS) Jones v. Velocity Technology Solutions

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GARRISON JONES, No. 2:19-cv-2374-KJM-EFB PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS VELOCITY TECHNOLOGY

SOLUTIONS LLC; STEVE KLOEBLEN;

SUSAN HALTOPP; MICHAEL

BALDWIN; SHANA COLEMAN;

VICKIE LEROUX; J.C. ODOM; CHAD CARLSON; and CHRIS HELLER, 17 Defendants.

19 On July 31, 2020, the court determined that service of the complaint is appropriate for defendant Velocity Technology Solutions, LLC (“Velocity”), but not for remaining eight defendants. ECF No. 29. The court informed plaintiff he could proceed with his FMLA interference claim predicated on the termination of his employment against defendant Velocity or file an amended complaint within 30 days. Id. Plaintiff has elected to proceed only with the claim against Velocity. See ECF No. 30. 26 27 This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se, is before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). wOASe…