(PC) Aleem v. Covello

Opinion

FAROOQ ABDUL ALEEM, No. 2:20-cv-0629 KJM CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER Defendants. Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On November 25, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff he could file objections. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations and the time for filing objections has expired. The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court ///// ....°). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed November 25, 2020 are adopted in full; 2. Plaintiffs third amended complaint is dismissed; and 3. This case is closed. DATED: February 22, 2021. ( ti / ¢ q_/ CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE