Michelle Renee Goodwin v. Butte County, et al.

E.D. California

Michelle Renee Goodwin v. Butte County, et al.

DecidedSeptember 10, 2025

Docket2:25-cv-00320

StatusUnknown

This text of Michelle Renee Goodwin v. Butte County, et al. (Michelle Renee Goodwin v. Butte County, 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

Michelle Renee Goodwin v. Butte County, et al., (E.D. Cal. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHELLE RENEE GOODWIN, No. 2:25-cv-0320-TLN-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 BUTTE COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Michelle Renee Goodwin (“Plaintiff”) filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff proceeds in this action pro se. The matter was referred to a 19 United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 14, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 21 were served on plaintiff and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 21.) No party filed objections 23 to the findings and recommendations. 24 Although it appears from the docket that Plaintiff’s copy of the findings and 25 recommendations was returned, Plaintiff was properly served. Under Local Rule 182(f), a pro se 26 party is under a continuing duty to notify the Clerk of the District Court and all other parties of 27 any change of address. E.D. Cal. L. R. 182(f) (Jan. 1, 2025). Absent such notice, service of 28 documents at the prior address of the pro se party is fully effective. Id. 1 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 2 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 3 Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007). Having reviewed the file, the Court finds 4 the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s 5 analysis. 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 21), are ADOPTED in full; and 8 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice. 9 Date: September 9, 2025 10 11 12 13 14 15 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 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHELLE RENEE GOODWIN, No. 2:25-cv-0320-TLN-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 BUTTE COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Michelle Renee Goodwin (“Plaintiff”) filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff proceeds in this action pro se. The matter was referred to a 19 United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 14, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 21 were served on plaintiff and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 21.) No party filed objections 23 to the findings and recommendations. 24 Although it appears from the docket that Plaintiff’s copy of the findings and 25 recommendations was returned, Plaintiff was properly served. Under Local Rule 182(f), a pro se 26 party is under a continuing duty to notify the Clerk of the District Court and all other parties of 27 any change of address. E.D. Cal. L. R. 182(f) (Jan. 1, 2025). Absent such notice, service of 28 documents at the prior address of the pro se party is fully effective. Id. 1 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 2 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 3 Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007). Having reviewed the file, the Court finds 4 the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s 5 analysis. 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 21), are ADOPTED in full; and 8 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice. 9 Date: September 9, 2025 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Michelle Renee Goodwin v. Butte County, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michelle-renee-goodwin-v-butte-county-et-al-caed-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack