Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00375/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00375-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
City of Sacramento
Defendant
Raymond M. Douglas
Plaintiff
Rath
Defendant
Sacramento Police Department
Defendant

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 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RAYMOND M. DOUGLAS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CITY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:16-cv-0375 MCE AC (PS) 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed the above-entitled action. 

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge by Local Rule 302(c)(21). 

 On June 10, 2016, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 

herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any 

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. 

ECF No. 13. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. ECF 

No. 14. 

 The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED that: 

/// 

/// 

Case 2:16-cv-00375-MCE-AC Document 15 Filed 07/15/16 Page 1 of 3
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

 1. The findings and recommendations filed June 10, 2016 (ECF No. 13), are 

ADOPTED IN FULL; 

 2. All Section 1983 claims against Defendants City of Sacramento and 

Sacramento Police Department are DISMISSED with prejudice, and all state claims 

against those defendants are DISMISSED without prejudice to their renewal in an 

appropriate state forum; 

 3. Service is appropriate for the following defendant: Police Officer Rath, Badge 

# 610. 

 a. Plaintiff is directed to supply the U.S. Marshal, within 30 days from the 

date this order is electronically filed, with all information needed by the Marshal to effect 

service of process (listed below). Within 10 days of having supplied this information, 

plaintiff shall file a statement with the court that said documents have been submitted to 

the United States Marshal (see attachment). The required documents shall be submitted 

directly to the United States Marshal either by personal delivery or by mail to: United 

States Marshals Service, 501 “I” Street, Suite 5600, Sacramento, CA 95814 (tel. 916-

930-2030). The court anticipates that, to effect service, the U.S. Marshal will require, for 

each defendant in paragraph 2 above, at least: 

 (1) One completed summons; 

 (2) One completed USM-285 form; 

 (3) One copy of the endorsed filed Second Amended Complaint, 

with an extra copy for the United States Marshal; 

 (4) One copy of the form to consent or decline to consent to 

magistrate judge jurisdiction; and 

 (5) One copy of this order. 

 b. The United States Marshal is directed to serve process promptly on 

each defendant identified in paragraph 2 above, without prepayment of costs. 

/// 

/// 

Case 2:16-cv-00375-MCE-AC Document 15 Filed 07/15/16 Page 2 of 3
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 

3

 c. In the event the U.S. Marshal is unable, for any reason whatsoever, to 

effect service within 90 days from the date of this order, the Marshal is directed to report 

that fact, and the reasons for it, to the undersigned. 

 d. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the 

U.S. Marshal, 501 “I” Street, Suite 5600, Sacramento, CA 95814 (tel. 916-930-2030). 

Dated: July 15, 2016 

Case 2:16-cv-00375-MCE-AC Document 15 Filed 07/15/16 Page 3 of 3