Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02824/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02824-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1981 Civil Rights

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

FREDERICK MARCELES COOLEY, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CITY OF VALLEJO, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-2824 TLN AC (PS) 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

 This matter was referred to the undersigned by E.D. Cal. R. 302(c)(21). On April 23, 

2015, defendants filed a Statement of Death advising the court that plaintiff had died on or about 

April 22, 2015. ECF No. 11. After being briefed on the matter, the court determined that 

plaintiff’s claim did not abate, and that his three-year-old son, non-party Frederick Marceles 

Cooley, Jr., was the decedent’s successor. ECF No. 23. Accordingly, Frederick Marceles 

Cooley, Jr., could file a motion to substitute in as plaintiff. See Fed. R. Civ. P. (“Rule”) 25(a)(1) 

(a “motion for substitution may be made by . . . the decedent’s successor . . .”). 

 The court thereupon ordered the Statement of Death to be served upon non-parties 

Frederick Marceles Cooley, Jr. (a minor), and his mother, Jennifer Johnson, in accordance with 

Rule 4. ECF No. 23; see Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(3) (a statement noting death must be served on 

non-parties in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4). On January 13, 2016, defendants filed a 

Certificate of Service advising the court that they had served non-parties Frederick Marceles 

Case 2:14-cv-02824-TLN-AC Document 31 Filed 05/12/16 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2

Cooley, Jr. and his mother, Jennifer Johnson, on January 5, 2016, using “substituted service” 

under California law. ECF No. 28. 

 A motion to substitute Frederick Marceles Cooley, Jr. in as plaintiff, accompanied by a 

Motion to Appoint a Guardian ad Litem for him, was due 90 days after service of the statement of 

death. ECF No. 23; Rule 25(a)(1) (if the motion to substitute is not filed within 90 days of 

service of the statement of death, “the action by or against the decedent must be dismissed”). 

 The court’s order of October 9, 2015 cautioned that failure to timely file a motion for 

substitution would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. ECF No. 23. The 

time for filing a motion for substitution has expired, and no such motion has been filed. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this matter be dismissed pursuant to 

Rule 25(a)(1), based upon the statement of plaintiff’s death, and the failure of plaintiff’s 

successor or representative to file a motion for substitution within 90 days of service. 

 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within twenty one days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party, may file written 

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Id.; see also Local Rule 304(b). For this 

purpose, “party” includes Frederick Marceles Cooley, Jr. or his proper representative. Such a 

document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 

Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed with the court and served on all 

parties within fourteen days after service of the objections. Local Rule 304(d). Failure to file 

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 

Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1156-57 

(9th Cir. 1991). 

DATED: May 12, 2016 

Case 2:14-cv-02824-TLN-AC Document 31 Filed 05/12/16 Page 2 of 2