Emrit v. Musk
Emrit v. Musk
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION
RONALD SATISH EMRIT, CV-25-08-BLG-SPW Plaintiff, VS. ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE’S FINDINGS ELON MUSK, VIVEK AND RECOMMENDATIONS RAMASWAMY, MIKE JOHNSON, DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, Defendants.
The United States Magistrate Judge filed Findings and Recommendations on March 20, 2025. (Doc. 6). The Magistrate recommended that this matter be dismissed, without leave to amend, because the action is frivolous. (Doc. 6 at 2-6). Pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), parties are required to file written objections within 14 days of the filing of the Magistrate’s Findings and Recommendation. No objections were filed. When neither party objects, this Court reviews the Magistrate’s Findings and Recommendation for clear error. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc.,
656 F.2d 1309, 1313(9th Cir. 1981). Clear error exists if the Court is left with a “definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” United States v. Syrax,
235 F.3d 422, 427(9th Cir.
2000). After reviewing the Findings and Recommendation, this Court does not find
that the Magistrate committed clear error. IT IS ORDERED that the proposed Findings and Recommendations entered
by the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. 6) are ADOPTED IN FULL.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is dismissed, without leave to
amend. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
—fA— DATED this 8 day of April, 2025.
SUSAN P. WATTERS United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown