Jose L. Castillo v. C. Johnson

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 25, 20215:18-cv-02187California3,965 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2

3

4 5 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

9 10 JOSE L. CASTILLO, Case No. EDCV 18-2187-VAP (KK) 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. FINAL REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED

13 C. JOHNSON, ET AL., STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 Defendant(s). 15 16 17 This Final Report and Recommendation is submitted to the Honorable 18 Virginia A. Phillips, United States District Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and 19 General Order 05-07 of the United States District Court for the Central District of 20 California. 21 I. 22 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION 23 Jose L. Castillo (“Plaintiff”) filed a Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) 24 pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 25 U.S. 388 (1971), against defendant C. Johnson (“Defendant”) and four Doe 26 defendants (collectively, “Doe defendants”) in their individual capacity. For nearly six 27 months and after multiple attempts by Defendant to schedule Plaintiff’s deposition by 1 prosecute this action. Defendant has now filed a Motion…

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.