Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-01097/USCOURTS-caed-2_21-cv-01097-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 29:621 Job Discrimination (Age)

---

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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ARMOND SARKIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

YOLO COUNTY PUBLIC AGENCY

RISK MANAGEMENT INSURANCE

AUTHORITY, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:21-cv-01097-TLN-JDP

ORDER

On September 12, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 

which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 

and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 18.) No objections were 

filed.

The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 

F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 

See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 

magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court[.]”). 

Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 

the record and by the proper analysis.

///

Case 2:21-cv-01097-TLN-JDP Document 19 Filed 09/30/22 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

27

28

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed September 12, 2022 (ECF No. 18) are 

ADOPTED in full.

2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 7) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in 

part as follows: 

a. Plaintiff’s official capacity claims against Defendants Cook and Martinez are 

DISMISSED without leave to amend. 

b. Plaintiff’s Title VII, ADEA, and retaliation and discrimination claims under the 

FEHA against Defendant Cook in her individual capacity are DISMISSED without leave to 

amend. 

c. The balance of the motion is DENIED, and this action shall proceed on 

Plaintiff’s FEHA hostile work environment claim against Defendant Cook in her individual

capacity and Plaintiff’s Title VII, ADEA, and the FEHA claims against Defendant Yolo.

3. Defendants Yolo and Cook are directed to file an answer within fourteen days of the 

electronic filing date of this Order.

DATED: September 30, 2022

Troy L. Nunley

United States District Judge

Case 2:21-cv-01097-TLN-JDP Document 19 Filed 09/30/22 Page 2 of 2