Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Greene v. State of California

United States District Court, D. Nevada

July 16, 2015

Cedric Greene, Plaintiff
v.
The People of the State of California, Defendant

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [DOC. 4], AND DISMISSING CASE WITH PREJUDICE

Jennifer A. Dorsey United States District Judge

After being declared a vexatious litigant in his home state of California, pro se plaintiff Cedric Greene moved his litigation to Nevada, where he has filed ten cases[1] just this year. By this case, Greene seeks to expunge a conviction from his California state criminal record.[2] Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen granted Greene pauper status and screened his complaint.[3] She finds that this court lacks jurisdiction over this action because California law requires Greene to file his petition in the superior court for the county in which he was convicted if he wishes to expunge a conviction, and “Greene does not identify any federal or state statute that would authorize this Court to provide the relief he requests.”[4] She also concludes that venue is not proper in Nevada because Greene, a resident of Los Angeles County, California, seeks relief that “only the Superior Court of that county can grant.”[5] Based on these proposed findings, Magistrate Judge Leen recommends I dismiss this case with prejudice.[6] Greene objects.[7]

Discussion

“No review is required of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation unless objections are filed, ”[8] and this district’s Local Rule IB 3-2(b) requires de novo consideration of specific objections only.[9] Greene concedes the venue issue and argues only that “Civil Rule 102” counsels the court to keep the case in Nevada.[10] The rule he quotes is Federal Rule of Evidence 102, which does nothing to establish either this court’s subject-matter jurisdiction or Nevada as the proper venue for this purely California matter. Having reviewed Magistrate Judge Leen’s findings and recommendation-along with Greene’s objection-de novo, I agree with Judge Leen’s findings and likewise conclude that this court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over Greene’s lawsuit and that the District of Nevada is an improper venue for this litigation.[11]

Conclusion

Accordingly, with good cause appearing and no reason for delay, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that Magistrate Judge Leen’s report and recommendation [Doc. 4] is ADOPTED in its entirety, Greene’s objections [Doc. 8] are overruled, and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is instructed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.