Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02454/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02454-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
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

1

 The bulk of plaintiff’s objections are challenges to the magistrate judge’s October 12,

2005 and November 2, 2005 orders. However, motions for reconsideration must be filed within

ten days from the date of the order. Local Rule 72-303(b). Accordingly, plaintiff’s request for

this court to reconsider these orders is untimely.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARYL GRANT,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-03-2454 LKK JFM PS

vs.

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was

referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).

On November 30, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. Plaintiff has

filed objections to the findings and recommendations.1 Defendants have filed an opposition to

plaintiff’s objections. Plaintiff has filed a reply.

Case 2:03-cv-02454-LKK -JFM Document 69 Filed 02/24/06 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

2

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-

304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire

file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by

proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed November 30, 2005, are adopted in

full; 

2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R.

Civ. P. 41(b).

DATED: February 23, 2006.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/gran2454.805

Case 2:03-cv-02454-LKK -JFM Document 69 Filed 02/24/06 Page 2 of 2