McCloud
McCloud v. Bird-Hunt
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIE MCCLOUD, Case No.: 3:19-cv-00618-WQH-JLB
AMENDED ORDER
Plaintiff, 13 v.
T. BIRD-HUNT, et al.,
16 Defendants. 17 HAYES, Judge: 18 The Order (ECF No. 18) and Clerk’s Judgment (ECF No. 19) filed on February 12, 19 2020 are HEREBY VACATED. 20 The matters before the Court are the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants (ECF 21 No. 10) and the Report and Recommendation issued by the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 22 17). 23 The duties of the district court in connection with a report and recommendation of a 24 magistrate judge are set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 25 636(b). The district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the 26 report . . . to which objection is made,” and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in 27 part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The 28 1 || district court need not review de novo those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which neither party objects. See Wang v. Masaitis, 416…