You're viewing Docket Item 19 from the case (PS) Thomas v. United Air Lines, Inc. et al. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28



Case 2:13-cv-00745-MCE-EFB Document 19 Filed 08/20/13 Page 1 of 2















UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SYLVIA THOMAS,

No. 2:13-cv-745-MCE-EFB PS

Plaintiff,

v.



ORDER

UNITED AIR LINES, INC.; RAFAEL
PADILLA CRUZ; and DOES 1-50,
inclusive,

Defendants.



On July 11, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 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. Plaintiff filed objections on July 25,

2013, and they were considered by the undersigned.



This court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which

objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore

Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). As

to any portion of the proposed findings of fact to which no objection has been made, the court

assumes its correctness and decides the motions on the applicable law. 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 Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983).






1


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28



Case 2:13-cv-00745-MCE-EFB Document 19 Filed 08/20/13 Page 2 of 2



The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing,

concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed Findings and Recommendations in full.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed July 11, 2013, are ADOPTED;

2. Defendant United Air Lines’ motion to dismiss, ECF No. 5, is granted; and

3. Defendant United Air Lines is dismissed from this action.

2