Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02799/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02799-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 895
Nature of Suit: Freedom of Information Act of 1974
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL R. JONES, No. 2:11-CV-02799-MCE-CMK

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMP.

PROGRAMS,

Defendant.

 /

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

§ 522a(g)(1) to remedy alleged violations of the Privacy Act of 1974. The matter was referred to

a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules.

On October 22, 2012, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations

herein (ECF No. 44) which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the

parties may file objections within a specified time. Timely objections to the findings and

recommendations have been filed.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

1

Case 2:11-cv-02799-MCE-CMK Document 56 Filed 02/26/13 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

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

304(f), 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 October 22, 2012 (ECF No. 44)

are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF Nos. 32 and 35) is GRANTED; 

3. Plaintiff’s access claim is DISMISSED with prejudice as moot; 

4. Plaintiff’s amendment claim is DISMISSED without prejudice and

without leave to amend as unexhausted; 

5. Plaintiff’s claim for benefits is DISMISSED with prejudice as an

impermissible collateral challenge to the underlying agency decisions; 

6. Plaintiff’s catch-all damages claim is DISMISSED with leave to amend;

and

7. Plaintiff’s motion for discovery (ECF No 31) is DENIED without

prejudice to renewal, at the earliest, following filing of an amended complaint; and

8. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint, if he chooses to do so, within

thirty (30) days from the date this Order is electronically filed. If no amended pleading is filed

within 30 days, the Court will dismiss Plaintiff’s catch-all damages claim with prejudice and will

direct the Clerk of the Court to close this case. 

DATED:

2

Case 2:11-cv-02799-MCE-CMK Document 56 Filed 02/26/13 Page 2 of 2