Collins v. Biden

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10

11 MARVIN CHARO COLLINS, ) Case No.: 1:24-cv-01309 JLT EPG ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND ) RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE 13 v. ) ACTION WITH PREJUDICE, AND DIRECTING ) THE CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THIS CASE 14 JOSEPH ROBINETT BIDEN, JR., et al., ) ) (Doc. 8) 15 Defendants. ) ) 16

17 Marvin Charo Collins alleges violations of the Lanham Act by government officials, including 18 President Biden. (Doc. 1.) Reviewing the complaint, the magistrate judge found “all of Plaintiff’s 19 claims are absolutely meritless….” (Doc. 8 at 6; see also id. at 3-6.) The magistrate judge found “the 20 complaint could not be saved by amendment.” (Id.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended 21 “the complaint be dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend.” (Id.) 22 On November 22, 2024, Plaintiff filed a “Common Law Copyright Notice” and a copy of the 23 Findings and Recommendations with handwritten notations, including an indication that Plaintiff does 24 “not consent.” (See generally Doc. 8.) To the extent the “Copyright Notice” and attached documents 25 are responses to the Findings and Recommendations, the documents appear irrelevant. The filed 26 documents do not specifically address the findings of the magistrate judge. 27 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case. 28 Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the record and proper analysis support the 1 || findings that the action is meritless and subject to dismissal. See Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 53 2 ||(1974). Thus, the Court ORDERS: 3 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated November 12, 2024 (Doc. 8) are ADOPTED. 4 2. The action is DISMISSED with prejudice. 5 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 6 8 Dated: _ December 22, 2024 ( Lint Up LU | WY) h \ 9 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28