Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01309/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01309-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

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

Marvin Charo Collins alleges violations of the Lanham Act by government officials, including 

President Biden. (Doc. 1.) Reviewing the complaint, the magistrate judge found “all of Plaintiff’s 

claims are absolutely meritless....” (Doc. 8 at 6; see also id. at 3-6.) The magistrate judge found “the 

complaint could not be saved by amendment.” (Id.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended 

“the complaint be dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend.” (Id.) 

On November 22, 2024, Plaintiff filed a “Common Law Copyright Notice” and a copy of the 

Findings and Recommendations with handwritten notations, including an indication that Plaintiff does 

“not consent.” (See generally Doc. 8.) To the extent the “Copyright Notice” and attached documents 

are responses to the Findings and Recommendations, the documents appear irrelevant. The filed 

documents do not specifically address the findings of the magistrate judge. 

According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. 

Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the record and proper analysis support the 

MARVIN CHARO COLLINS,

 Plaintiff,

v.

JOSEPH ROBINETT BIDEN, JR., et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:24-cv-01309 JLT EPG

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE 

ACTION WITH PREJUDICE, AND DIRECTING 

THE CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THIS CASE 

(Doc. 8)

Case 1:24-cv-01309-JLT-EPG Document 10 Filed 12/23/24 Page 1 of 2
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

findings that the action is meritless and subject to dismissal. See Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536 

(1974). Thus, the Court ORDERS:

1. The Findings and Recommendations dated November 12, 2024 (Doc. 8) are ADOPTED.

2. The action is DISMISSED with prejudice.

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 22, 2024 

Case 1:24-cv-01309-JLT-EPG Document 10 Filed 12/23/24 Page 2 of 2