Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01603/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01603-9/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 

CHRISTOPHER WHITE, ZERITA 

WHITE, G’SHELLE WHITE AND 

DANTRELL STEVENS, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

CITY OF VALLEJO, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-1603 JAM DB PS (TEMP) 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a 

United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). 

 On June 28, 2016, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 

were served on all parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 

recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days after service of the findings and 

recommendations. The fourteen-day period has expired, and no party has filed objections to the 

findings and recommendations. 

 Although it appears from the docket that plaintiff Zerita White’s copy of the findings and 

recommendations were returned as undeliverable and unable to be forwarded, plaintiff was 

properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of her current 

address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of 

Case 2:14-cv-01603-JAM-DB Document 56 Filed 08/31/16 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

the party is fully effective. 

 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

 1. The findings and recommendations filed June 28, 2016 (Dkt. No. 50) are 

adopted in full; 

 2. Defendants’ April 12, 2016 motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 38) is denied, without 

prejudice, as having been rendered moot; and 

 3. Plaintiff Dantrell Stevens is dismissed from this action. 

DATED: August 31, 2016 

 John A. Mendez___________________________ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

/white1603.jo

Case 2:14-cv-01603-JAM-DB Document 56 Filed 08/31/16 Page 2 of 2