Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Demetrio A. Quintero v. Clovis Unified School District

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 4, 2012

DEMETRIO A. QUINTERO
PLAINTIFF,
v.
CLOVIS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND DOES 1 TO 8, DEFENDANTS.

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. No. 5)

On April 30, 2012, plaintiff Demetrio Quintero ("Plaintiff"), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a complaint in this Court against the Clovis Unified School District ("CUSD" or "Defendant"). Plaintiff alleges he was discriminated against on the basis of race when Defendant refused to award him a sports officiating contract in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d and 2000e-2. (Doc. 1.) The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On June 6, 2012, United States Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe issued Findings and Recommendation ("F&R") that recommended dismissing the 28 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 claim without leave to amend. (Doc. 5.) However, the F&R found that Plaintiff's claim under 28 U.S.C. § 2000d was sufficiently pled for purposes of pro se screening and should not be dismissed. Id. The F&R was served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections to the F&R were to be filed within thirty days of service of the Order. (Doc. 6, 5: 2-3.) No objections have been filed.

In accordance with the provisions of Title 28 of the United States Code section 636(b), the Court has reviewed the case. The Court finds that the F&R is supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed June 6, 2012, (Doc. No. 5) is ADOPTED in full;

2. Plaintiff's claims 28 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 are DISMISSED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND; and

3. Plaintiff's claims under 28 U.S.C. § 2000d may proceed as they are sufficiently pled for purposes of pro se screening.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20121004

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.