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

ROBERT ALLAN PETERSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2226 LKK GGH P

vs.

NATHAN BURNETTE, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

1983. For the following reasons, the court recommends that the claims against defendant

Sacramento County contained in the amended complaint filed February 16, 2005, be dismissed.

On March 3, 2005, the court found that plaintiff’s amended complaint filed

February 16, 2005, stated a cognizable claim for relief against defendants Burnette and Deux. 

The court separately recommended that the claims against defendant Sacramento County be

dismissed. In particular, the court found that plaintiff did not allege that he was injured pursuant

to a municipal policy.

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02226-LKK -GGH Document 20 Filed 06/14/05 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

2

On March 9, 2005, plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 

 Plaintiff alleged that he was injured pursuant to a municipal policy. Because it appeared that

plaintiff could cure the pleading defects against defendant Sacramento County, on March 29,

2005, the court vacated the findings and recommendations and granted plaintiff thirty days to file

a second amended complaint. 

On April 27, 2005, plaintiff filed a second amended complaint naming as

defendants Officers Burnette and Deaux and Sacramento County. However, the second amended

complaint includes no allegations against defendants Burnette and Deaux. Rather, the second

amended complaint contains allegations regarding an incident involving different correctional

officers. Because the second amended complaint concerns events unrelated to those alleged in

the first amended complaint, the court has concurrently issued an order dismissing the second

amended complaint and reinstating the first amended complaint. The court has also ordered

service of defendants Burnette and Deaux. For the reasons stated in the March 3, 2005, findings

and recommendations, the court against recommends dismissal of defendant Sacramento County.

Granting plaintiff another opportunity to amend his complaint will further delay resolution of this

action.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the claims against

defendant Sacramento County contained in the February 16, 2005, amended complaint be

dismissed. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02226-LKK -GGH Document 20 Filed 06/14/05 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

3

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: 6/14/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ggh:kj

pet2226.dis

Case 2:04-cv-02226-LKK -GGH Document 20 Filed 06/14/05 Page 3 of 3