Goolsby
Goolsby v. San Diego, County of
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 THOMAS GOOLSBY, Case No.: 3:17-cv-00564-WQH-NLS
ORDER
Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et al.,
16 Defendants. 17 HAYES, Judge: 18 The matters before the Court are the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by 19 Defendant County of San Diego (ECF No. 137); the Report and Recommendation issued 20 by the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 154); the Objection filed by Plaintiff Thomas Goolsby 21 (ECF No. 157); the Objection filed by Defendant (ECF No. 158); the Supplemental 22 Objection filed by Plaintiff (ECF No. 162); and the Renewed Ex Parte Motion for a Copy 23 filed by Plaintiff (ECF No. 160). 24 The duties of the district court in connection with a report and recommendation of a 25 magistrate judge are set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 26 636(b). The district judge must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the 27 report … to which objection is made,” and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in 28 part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C.…