Jones

(PS) Gonzalez v. Jones

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 18, 20212:15-cv-02448California377 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DANIEL GONZALEZ, No. 2:15-cv-02448-TLN-KJN Plaintiff, ORDER

v. KYLE THOMAS JONES, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Daniel Gonzalez (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding in this action pro se. 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 January 29, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, 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. (ECF No. 216.) After two brief extensions of time, Plaintiff filed Objections to the Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 221), which have been considered by the Court. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304(f), this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir.…

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.