Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of California adopted a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation concerning defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court denied dismissal of the plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant Alonzo, granted dismissal as to Defendant Estrada with leave to amend, and set deadlines for an amended complaint and responsive pleading.
Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Decision date
February 2, 2026
Docket number
24-cv-2472-AJB-MMP
Disposition
other
Questions Presented
- Whether the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation should be adopted in the absence of party objections.
- Whether Defendants' motion to dismiss the First Amendment retaliation claim should be denied as to Alonzo.
- Whether Defendants' motion to dismiss the First Amendment retaliation claim should be granted as to Estrada, with leave to amend.
Holdings
- When no objections are filed, the district court may accept the magistrate judge's recommendation after satisfying itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.
- The motion to dismiss Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim was denied as to Defendant Mario Alonzo.
- The motion to dismiss Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim was granted as to Defendant R. Estrada, with leave for Plaintiff to file an amended complaint.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…