Condron v. Roberts

Aug 7, 2026

6:24-cv-02116

ORDER

BAGGIO, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge Beckerman issued a Findings and Recommendation on May 29, 2026, ECF No. 52, in which she recommends that this Court deny Plaintiff‘s Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint, ECF No. 46. The matter is now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge‘s Findings and Recommendation. Pl.‘s Obj., ECF No. 57. When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge‘s Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge‘s report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).

The Court has carefully considered Plaintiff‘s objections and concludes that there is no basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. The Court has also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and finds no error in the Magistrate Judge‘s Findings and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Beckerman‘s Findings and Recommendation [52]. Therefore, Plaintiff‘s Motion for Leave to Amend [46] is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 7th day of August, 2026.

AMY M. BAGGIO

United States District Judge