(PS) Zamudio v. FMC Corp.

Opinion

RAUL ZAMUDIO and SOLEDAD No. 2:16-cv-2693 DAD DB PS ZAMUDIO, Plaintiffs, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. Defendant. Plaintiffs Raul Zamudio and Soledad Zamudio are proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On September 6, 2023, defendant filed a request for dismissal of this action with prejudice asserting that the parties have “reached a full and final settlement of all claims[.]” (ECF No. 108 at 1.) Attached to defendant’s request was a copy of a signed settlement agreement between the parties. (Id. at 4-13.) On September 7, 2023, the undersigned issued an order, ordering plaintiffs to file an opposition to defendant’s request to dismiss, if any, within fourteen days. (ECF No. 109.) The fourteen-day period has passed and neither plaintiff has filed an opposition to defendant’s request. //// //// Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed with prejudice and the case be closed. 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 fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are 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: October 20, 2023 /s/ DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DLB:6 DB\orders\orders.pro se\zamudio2693.dism.f&rs