MACIEL v. AMBROSELLI, CV 11-7199-AG (RNB). (2012)
Court: District Court, C.D. California
Number: infdco20120504e11
Visitors: 32
Filed: May 03, 2012
Latest Update: May 03, 2012
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE ANDREW J. GUILFORD, District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have been made. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, subject to th
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE ANDREW J. GUILFORD, District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have been made. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, subject to the..
More
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
ANDREW J. GUILFORD, District Judge.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have been made. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, subject to the following typographical corrections. First, on page 2, line 1 of the R&R, a space should be inserted between "290" and "(a)." Second, the last sentence of the first full paragraph on page 2 of the R&R should be corrected to read: "The District Judge further found that the public interest against issuing a TRO was particularly compelling."
IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that (1) respondent's Motion to Dismiss is granted; and (2) Judgment be entered dismissing this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Source: Leagle
