(PC) Meeks v. Butte County Sheriff's Dept.

Opinion

JANAI SERENE OPAL MEEKS, No. 2:22-cv-0472 KJM KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants.

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, 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 May 26, 2022, 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 fourteen days. Plaintiff did not file 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 May 26, 2022, are adopted in full; 2. Plaintiffs claims alleging violations of her constitutional rights related to her criminal proceedings are dismissed as duplicative of the claims raised in 2:22-cv-0471 JDP; and 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial proceedings. DATED: July 13, 2022. ee CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE