Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00125/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00125-1/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

Maria Consuelo Bravo Acevedo seeks to hold the defendants liable for violations of her 

constitutional rights. (See generally Doc. 11.) Kaweah Health moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s amended 

complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 18.) The 

magistrate judge found the allegations in the complaint “are vague and conclusory,” and Plaintiff 

“fails to identify what each named defendant did that lead to the deprivation of [her] constitutional 

rights.” (Doc. 24 at 3.) The magistrate judge found Plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to support 

her claims for constitutional violations or discrimination under Title VII. (Id. at 3-7.) Because “the 

factual basis for Plaintiff’s complaints is largely unclear,” the magistrate judge found the Court could 

not determine whether the pleading deficiencies could be cured. (Id. at 7.) Therefore, the magistrate 

judge recommended the motion to dismiss be granted, and Plaintiff be given leave to amend. (Id.)

MARIA CONSUELO BRAVO ACEVEDO,

 Plaintiff,

v.

KAWEAH HEALTH, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:24-cv-0125 JLT SKO

ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS WITH 

LEAVE TO AMEND, AND TERMINATING AS 

MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO CHANGE THE 

DEFENDANTS’ NAMES 

(Docs. 7, 18, 24)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE A 

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHIN 30 

DAYS

Case 1:24-cv-00125-JLT-SKO Document 28 Filed 11/15/24 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

Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Findings and Recommendations. (Doc. 26.) However, 

Plaintiff does not address the specific findings of the magistrate judge. (See id. at 1-5.) Rather, 

Plaintiff adds new factual allegations to support her claims. The new allegations do not undermine the 

findings of the magistrate judge related to the pleading deficiencies of the amended complaint. See 

Ajaelo v. Carrillo, 2022 WL 35659, at *3 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2022) (“The new allegations and 

documents submitted by Plaintiff with [the] Objections are not a substitute for factual allegations in the 

Complaint.”). Furthermore, the Court declines to consider the new allegations at this juncture. See 

Brown v. Roe, 279 F.3d 742, 744-45 (9th Cir. 2002) (indicating it is within the discretion of the Court 

to consider any new arguments made in objections). As the magistrate judge determined, the 

allegations stated in the amended complaint are vague and conclusory, and Plaintiff failed to allege 

facts sufficient to state cognizable claims. 

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

carefully reviewed the matter, including Plaintiff’s objections, the Court concludes the Findings and 

Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS:

1. The Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 24) are ADOPTED in full.

2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 18) is GRANTED, with leave to amend.

3. Plaintiff’s motion to change the defendants’ names (Doc. 7) is terminated as MOOT.

4. Plaintiff SHALL file a second amended complaint within 30 days of the date of service 

of this order. The second amended complaint SHALL include all factual allegations to 

support the claims, without reference to prior pleadings.

Failure to file a second amended complaint within the specified timeframe will result in 

the action being dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to 

comply with the Court’s order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 15, 2024 

Case 1:24-cv-00125-JLT-SKO Document 28 Filed 11/15/24 Page 2 of 2