Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-00836/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-00836-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

EDWARD RINGGOLD,

Plaintiff,

v.

BURGETT, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:22-cv-00836-DAD-CKD (PS)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 

THIS ACTION

(Doc. No. 61)

Plaintiff Edward Ringgold, proceeding pro se, initiated this civil action on May 22, 2022. 

(Doc. No. 1.) This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On July 21, 2023, the assigned magistrate judge examined whether the court has 

jurisdiction over this action and issued findings and recommendations recommending that the 

court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff’s claims arising under state law 

because no federal claims remain in this action. (Doc. No. 61.) Accordingly, the magistrate 

judge recommended that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, so that plaintiff may re-file 

his remaining claims under state law in state court. (Id. at 5–6.) Those pending findings and 

recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections thereto 

were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 6.) To date, no objections to the 

/////

Case 2:22-cv-00836-DAD-CKD Document 62 Filed 08/10/23 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

pending findings and recommendations have been filed, and the time in which to do so has now 

passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this court has conducted a 

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 

findings and recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, 

1. The findings and recommendations issued on July 21, 2023 (Doc. No. 8) are 

adopted in full; 

2. The court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff’s state law 

claims, which are the only claims remaining in this action;

3. This action is dismissed, without prejudice; and

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 9, 2023 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:22-cv-00836-DAD-CKD Document 62 Filed 08/10/23 Page 2 of 2