Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01628/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01628-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
ATT
Defendant
Pastor Isabel Vela
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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PASTOR ISABEL VELA,

Plaintiff,

v.

ATT,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:23-cv-01628 JLT SKO

ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, 

DISMISSING THE FIRST AMENDED 

COMPLAINT, AND DIRECTING THE 

CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE

(Doc. 7)

Pastor Isabel Vela is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action, seeking to 

hold the defendant liable for violations of her rights under the First, Fourth, and Ninth 

Amendments; the Clayton Act; “bait and switch” and her rights to freedom of religion. (Doc. 6.)

The magistrate judge reviewed the First Amended Complaint and found that, “despite the 

explicit recitation of the deficiencies of the original complaint, Plaintiff has failed to plead any 

cognizable claims.” (Doc. 7 at 1.) Plaintiff failed to “allege facts to support a finding that 

Defendant has acted such that their conduct is fairly attributable to the government” for purposes 

of a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, failed to meet the “heightened pleading standard” for fraud 

claims, and did not allege an antitrust injury under the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15. (Id. at 3–6.) 

Furthermore, the magistrate judge found Plaintiff “repeatedly demonstrated that she is unable to 

marshal facts sufficient to constitute a cognizable claim and that the addition of more detailed 

factual allegations or revision of Plaintiff’s claims will not cure the defects of her amended 

Case 1:23-cv-01628-JLT-SKO Document 8 Filed 03/01/24 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

complaint.” (Id. at 6.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended dismissal without leave to 

amend for failure to state a claim. (Id.) 

The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified her that 

any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 7 at 1, 6.) The Court advised Plaintiff that the 

“failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” 

(Id. at 6, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file 

objections, and the time to do so has passed. 

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

case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and 

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

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued February 8, 2024 (Doc. 7) are 

ADOPTED in full.

2. This action is DISMISSED due to Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim.

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 1, 2024 

Case 1:23-cv-01628-JLT-SKO Document 8 Filed 03/01/24 Page 2 of 2