(PS) Alston v. City of Sacramento

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ERIC ANTHONY ALSTON, JR., No. 2:21-cv-2049 DAD AC PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CITY OF SACRAMENTO; SGT. HAMM, #3018; OFFICER DELGADO, #358; OFFICER MELLOCH, #602, Defendants. 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se and the case was accordingly referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 302(c)(21). Defendants move for summary judgment. ECF No. 32. Plaintiff filed an untimely opposition to the motion. ECF No. 35. Defendants replied. ECF No. 36. In the interest of justice and judicial economy, the court has fully considered all papers and argument, including plaintiff’s untimely opposition. For the reasons explained below, defendants’ motion should be GRANTED. I. Procedural Background Plaintiff filed this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of his First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights, along with related state law claims, on 27 …