1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PASTOR ISABEL VELA, Case No. 1:23-cv-01628 JLT SKO 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, 13 v. DISMISSING THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT, AND DIRECTING THE 14 ATT, CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THE CASE 15 Defendant. (Doc. 7) 16 17 Pastor Isabel Vela is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action, seeking to 18 hold the defendant liable for violations of her rights under the First, Fourth, and Ninth 19 Amendments; the Clayton Act; “bait and switch” and her rights to freedom of religion. (Doc. 6.) 20 The magistrate judge reviewed the First Amended Complaint and found that, “despite the 21 explicit recitation of the deficiencies of the original complaint, Plaintiff has failed to plead any 22 cognizable claims.” (Doc. 7 at 1.) Plaintiff failed to “allege facts to support a finding that 23 Defendant has acted such that their conduct is fairly attributable to the government” for purposes 24 of a claim under

, failed to meet the “heightened pleading standard” for fraud 25 claims, and did not allege an antitrust injury under the Clayton Act,

. (Id. at 3–6.) 26 Furthermore, the magistrate judge found Plaintiff “repeatedly demonstrated that she is unable to 27 marshal facts sufficient to constitute a cognizable claim and that the addition of more detailed 28 factual allegations or revision of Plaintiff’s claims will not cure the defects of her amended 1 | complaint.” (d. at 6.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended dismissal without leave to 2 | amend for failure to state a claim. (d.) 3 The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on Plaintiff and notified her that 4 | any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 7 at 1, 6.) The Court advised Plaintiff that the 5 | “failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” 6 | Ud. at 6, citing Wilkerson v. Wheeler,

(9th Cir. 2014).) Plaintiff did not file 7 | objections, and the time to do so has passed. 8 According to

(b)(1)(C), this Court performed a de novo review of this 9 | case. Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and 10 || Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 11 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued February 8, 2024 (Doc. 7) are 12 ADOPTED in full. 13 2. This action is DISMISSED due to Plaintiffs failure to state a claim. 14 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 | Dated: _Mareh 1, 2024 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28