IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 12, 2011
PENNY ARNOLD, PLAINTIFF,
COUNTY OF EL DORADO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
In this case, plaintiff is proceeding pro se on civil rights and related claims against El Dorado County and two deputy sheriffs.
On March 15, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections have been filed.*fn1
Accordingly, the court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).
The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the Findings and Recommendations in full.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendations filed March 15, 2011, are ADOPTED and
1. Defendants' motion to dismiss, filed on January 28, 2011 (ECF 8), is denied in all respects except as set forth in (2), (3) and (4) below;
2. All claims with respect to unlawful arrest are dismissed with prejudice;
3. The first cause of action (Monell) is dismissed as to defendant County of El Dorado with leave to amend;
4. To the extent that the third cause of action is any different from the first, and plaintiff is attempting to allege a Monell claim, it too is dismissed with leave to amend; and
5. If plaintiff wishes to file an amended complaint, she shall do so within fourteen (14) days of this order; if no amended complaint is filed within that time period, defendants shall file and serve an answer to the remaining claims within fourteen (14) days thereafter.