(PC) Leen v. Troth

Opinion

DOVIE D. LEEN, No. 2:20-cv-2039 KJM DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER M. TROTH, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims defendants used excessive force against him in violation of his Eighth Amendment rights. 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 16, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. (ECF No. 10.) Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 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 16, 2020, are adopted in full; 2. Plaintiffs motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 8) is denied; and 3. This case is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for all further pretrial proceedings. DATED: February 23, 2021. ( ti / ¢ q_/ CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9d