IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 10, 2012
SCOTT JOHNSTON, PLAINTIFF,
CITY OF RED BLUFF, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge
Plaintiff brings this civil action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634, against the City of Red Bluff and various of its employees. Plaintiff alleges age discrimination and related constitutional and state law torts with respect to his employment as an engineering technician for defendant City of Red Bluff. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules.
On July 19, 2012, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein (ECF No. 87) which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within a specified time. Timely objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304(f), this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed July 19, 2012, are ADOPTED IN FULL;
2. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 78) is DENIED; and 3. Defendants' request for relief pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f)(1) is DENIED without prejudice to filing a separate motion for summary judgment.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.