Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02320/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02320-15/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
City of Davis
Defendant
Joseph A. Sherman
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH A. SHERMAN,

Plaintiff, CIV-S-04-2320 LKK EFB PS

vs.

CITY OF DAVIS,

Defendant. ORDER

__________________________________/

On February 26, 2008, 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 ten days. Plaintiff filed objections on

March 4, 2008, and defendant filed a reply to plaintiff’s objections on March 14, 2008. Plaintiff

also filed a surreply on March 21, 2008, and defendant filed objections thereto on March 25,

2008. The undersigned has reviewed these filings.

This court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to

which objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v.

Commodore Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920

(1982). As to any portion of the proposed findings of fact to which no objection has been made,

the court assumes its correctness and decides the motions on the applicable law. See Orand v.

Case 2:04-cv-02320-LKK -EFB Document 111 Filed 03/26/08 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

2

United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 

reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir.

1983).

The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing,

concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed Findings and Recommendations in full. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed February 26, 2008, are

ADOPTED; 

2. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted in its entirety, and

judgment is entered in its favor; and,

3. The Clerk is directed to close the case.

DATED: March 25, 2008.

Case 2:04-cv-02320-LKK -EFB Document 111 Filed 03/26/08 Page 2 of 2