Gaylon Teslaa v. Vereuck Properties LLC, et al.

E.D. California

Gaylon Teslaa v. Vereuck Properties LLC, et al.

DecidedMarch 26, 2026

Docket2:25-cv-02685

StatusUnknown

This text of Gaylon Teslaa v. Vereuck Properties LLC, et al. (Gaylon Teslaa v. Vereuck Properties LLC, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gaylon Teslaa v. Vereuck Properties LLC, et al., (E.D. Cal. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GAYLON TESLAA, Case No. 2:25-cv-2685-DC-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 VEREUCK PROPERTIES LLC, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On February 6, 2026, I granted defendant County of Mono motion to dismiss and 18 dismissed all claims against County of Mono. ECF No. 30. Plaintiffs were granted thirty days to 19 file an amended complaint and warned that failure to timely do so would result in a 20 recommendation that this action be dismissed. Id. Lastly, I ordered plaintiffs to show cause why 21 the remaining defendants should not be dismissed for failure to timely effectuate service. Id. 22 The deadline has passed, and plaintiffs have neither filed an amended complaint nor 23 demonstrated that they served all defendants with the exception of County of Mono. 24 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that: 25 1. Plaintiffs’ claims against County of Mono be dismissed for failure to state a claim for 26 reasons set for in the court’s February 6, 2026 order. See ECF No. 30. 27 2. Plaintiffs’ claims against all other defendants be dismissed without prejudice for failure 28 to timely complete service of process. 1 3. The Clerk of Court be directed to close the case. 2 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 3 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days of 4 || service of these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the 5 || court and serve a copy on all parties. Any such document should be captioned “Objections to 6 || Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations,” and any response shall be served and filed 7 || within fourteen days of service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file 8 | objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See 9 || Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 10 | 1991). 1] D IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _ March 25, 2026 aw—— 14 JEREMY D. PETERSON 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GAYLON TESLAA, Case No. 2:25-cv-2685-DC-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 VEREUCK PROPERTIES LLC, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On February 6, 2026, I granted defendant County of Mono motion to dismiss and 18 dismissed all claims against County of Mono. ECF No. 30. Plaintiffs were granted thirty days to 19 file an amended complaint and warned that failure to timely do so would result in a 20 recommendation that this action be dismissed. Id. Lastly, I ordered plaintiffs to show cause why 21 the remaining defendants should not be dismissed for failure to timely effectuate service. Id. 22 The deadline has passed, and plaintiffs have neither filed an amended complaint nor 23 demonstrated that they served all defendants with the exception of County of Mono. 24 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that: 25 1. Plaintiffs’ claims against County of Mono be dismissed for failure to state a claim for 26 reasons set for in the court’s February 6, 2026 order. See ECF No. 30. 27 2. Plaintiffs’ claims against all other defendants be dismissed without prejudice for failure 28 to timely complete service of process. 1 3. The Clerk of Court be directed to close the case. 2 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 3 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days of 4 || service of these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the 5 || court and serve a copy on all parties. Any such document should be captioned “Objections to 6 || Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations,” and any response shall be served and filed 7 || within fourteen days of service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file 8 | objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See 9 || Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 10 | 1991). 1] D IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _ March 25, 2026 aw—— 14 JEREMY D. PETERSON 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Gaylon Teslaa v. Vereuck Properties LLC, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gaylon-teslaa-v-vereuck-properties-llc-et-al-caed-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack