(PC) Bennett v. Monroe Detention Center

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAVID BENNETT, No. 2:22-cv-2157-DJC-SCR P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 MONROE DETENTION CENTER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 Plaintiff, a county jail inmate proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action 18 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On May 14, 2025, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations 21 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that 22 any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty- 23 one days. Plaintiff filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 Although Petitioner has filed an appeal of the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 25 Recommendations (ECF No. 82), that does not deprive this Court of jurisdiction to 26 review the Findings and Recommendations. See e.g., Poye v. Parker, No. 1:08-cv- 27 00497-OWW-SMS, 2008 WL 4532515, at *1-2 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 8, 2008). “Where the 28 1 | deficiency in a notice of appeal, by reason of untimeliness, lack of essential recitals, or 2 | reference to a non-appealable order, is clear to the district court, it may disregard the 3 | purported notice of appeal and proceed with the case, knowing that it has not been 4 | deprived of jurisdiction.” Ruby v. Secretary of U.S. Navy, 365 F.2d 385, 389 (9th Cir. 5 | 1966). A Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations are not a final 6 | judgement without subsequent intervention by the district court and the notice of 7 | appeal after before the Findings and Recommendations are adopted is 8 | premature. Serine v. Peterson, 989 F.2d 371 (9th Cir. 1993). 9 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 10 | 304, this Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully 11 | reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be 12 | supported by the record and by proper analysis. 13 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 14 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 79) are adopted in full; 15 2. Plaintiff's second amended complaint (ECF No. 57) is dismissed without 16 | further leave to amend for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; 17 3. All of plaintiff's pending motions (ECF Nos. 58, 65, 69, 70, 72, 73) are denied 18 | as moot in light of the dismissal of this action; and 19 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 | Dated: _June 13, 2025 Donel J □□ bratte— Hon. Daniel alabretta 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 24 25 26 | benn2157.805 27 28