Filed: Aug. 09, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 09, 2013
Summary: ORDER ANNA J. BROWN, District Judge. Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued Findings and Recommendation (#169) on June 3, 2013, in which he recommends that this Court grant Defendants' Motion (#150) for Judgment on the Pleadings, which he construed as a Motion for Summary Judgment, and that Defendants' alternative Motion (#149) for Summary Judgment should be denied as moot. Plaintiff filed timely Objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28
Summary: ORDER ANNA J. BROWN, District Judge. Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued Findings and Recommendation (#169) on June 3, 2013, in which he recommends that this Court grant Defendants' Motion (#150) for Judgment on the Pleadings, which he construed as a Motion for Summary Judgment, and that Defendants' alternative Motion (#149) for Summary Judgment should be denied as moot. Plaintiff filed timely Objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U..
More
ORDER
ANNA J. BROWN, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued Findings and Recommendation (#169) on June 3, 2013, in which he recommends that this Court grant Defendants' Motion (#150) for Judgment on the Pleadings, which he construed as a Motion for Summary Judgment, and that Defendants' alternative Motion (#149) for Summary Judgment should be denied as moot. Plaintiff filed timely Objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). See also Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)(en banc).
In his Objections Plaintiff reiterates the arguments contained in his Response (#157) to Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, which this Court also construes as a Motion for Summary Judgment. Together with his Objections, Plaintiff submits a document purporting to confirm an appointment for mental-health counseling. Objections (#173) at 4. Plaintiff apparently intends this document to be construed as evidence of his mental-health impairment. The document, however, is irrelevant because, as Plaintiff acknowledges, Defendants do not dispute the existence of Plaintiff's mental-health issues. See Pl.'s Resp. to Mot. for J. on the Pleadings (#157) at 2.
Having reviewed the record, Plaintiff's Objections, and Defendants' Response to the Objections, the Court does not find any error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings and Recommendation (#169). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion (#150) for Judgment on the Pleadings (construed as a Motion for Summary Judgment) and DENIES as moot Defendants' alternative Motion (#149) for Summary Judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
