(PC) Joseph v. Noguchi

Opinion

ALONZO JAMES JOSEPH, No. 2:19-cv-00733 TLN DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER V.NOGUCHI, et al. Defendants. Plaintiff Alonzo James Joseph (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an action in Amador County Superior Court which was ultimately construed by the state court as a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Thereafter, the action was removed by Defendant V. Noguchi (“Noguchi”) to this Court.1 (See ECF Nos. 1–2.) The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On November 5, 2020, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. (ECF No. 10). Thirty days have now passed, and neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 1 At the time of removal, Noguchi also filed notice that the action was related to the previously-adjudicated Joseph v. Noguchi, No. 2:17-cv-01193-MCE-AC (E.D. Cal. Aug. 27, 2018). 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 Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations issued November 5, 2020 (ECF No. 10), are ADOPTED IN FULL, and 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110. DATED: December 14, 2020