Maxwell v. Holder, 2:14-cv-02772-TLN-AC. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20181231736
Visitors: 15
Filed: Dec. 28, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 28, 2018
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). On December 3, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within 21 days. (ECF No. 69.) Neither party has filed objections
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). On December 3, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within 21 days. (ECF No. 69.) Neither party has filed objections ..
More
ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21).
On December 3, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within 21 days. (ECF No. 69.) Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. Defendants withdrew one of the motions that the findings and recommendations addressed. (ECF No. 70.)
The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Circumstances changed after the magistrate judge filed the findings and recommendations, so the Court adopts in part and declines to adopt in part those findings and recommendations.
Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed December 3, 2018, are ADOPTED as to the DENIAL without prejudice of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 22), and the DENIAL of Plaintiff's Motion for a Permanent Injunction, (ECF No. 42);
2. The findings and recommendations are DENIED as MOOT as to the DENIAL of Defendants' Motion to Remand, (ECF No. 59), in light of Defendants' subsequent withdrawal of that motion, (ECF No. 70);
3. The findings and recommendations are ADOPTED as to the magistrate judge's recommendation that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services be ordered to VACATE the September 8, 2015, decision denying Plaintiff's naturalization application; and
4. The parties are ORDERED to APPEAR for a status conference before The Honorable Troy L. Nunley at 2:00 p.m. on January 10, 2019, in Courtroom 2, 15th Floor. All parties are required to appear in person.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
