Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01979/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01979-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 05:552 Freedom of Information 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM M. BRYSON, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

SUSAN B. GERSON, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:13-cv-01979-LJO-MJS

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS (1) FOR SERVICE 

OF COGNIZABLE CLAIMS IN FIRST 

AMENDED COMPALINT AGAINST 

DEFENDANT EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR 

UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS, AND (2) 

TO DISMISS ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND 

DEFENDANTS

(ECF Nos. 9, 13)

Plaintiff is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this 

action under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552. (ECF Nos. 4 & 9.)

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 of the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of California.

On November 21, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and 

recommendations (ECF No. 13) that (1) Plaintiff should proceed on the first amended 

complaint FOIA claim against Defendant Executive Office for United States Attorneys, 

and (2) all other claims asserted in the first amended complaint and all other named 

Case 1:13-cv-01979-LJO-MJS Document 14 Filed 12/16/14 Page 1 of 3
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

Defendants should be dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff did not object to the Findings 

and Recommendations and the time for doing so has passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the 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 (ECF No. 13), filed on November 21, 

2014, are adopted in full;

2. Plaintiff is to proceed on the first amended complaint FOIA claim against 

Defendant Executive Office for United States Attorneys;

3. All other claims asserted in the first amended complaint and all other named 

Defendants are dismissed with prejudice;

4. Service should be initiated on the following Defendant:

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS

5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send Plaintiff one (1) USM-285 form, one 

(1) summons, a Notice of Submission of Documents form, an instruction 

sheet, and a copy of the first amended complaint, filed September 8, 2014;

6. Within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, Plaintiff is to complete and 

return to the Court the notice of submission of documents along with the 

following documents:

a. Completed summons;

b. One completed USM-285 form for the Defendant listed above,

c. Two copies of the endorsed first amended complaint filed September 8, 

2014; and 

Case 1:13-cv-01979-LJO-MJS Document 14 Filed 12/16/14 Page 2 of 3
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

3

7. Upon receipt of the above-described documents, the Court will direct the 

United States Marshal to serve the above-named Defendant pursuant to 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 without payment of costs.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 15, 2014 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01979-LJO-MJS Document 14 Filed 12/16/14 Page 3 of 3