(PC) Pile v. Becker

District Court, E.D. California·Decided March 22, 2021·No. 2:20-cv-00728·Unknown

Opinion

JACOB M. PILE, No. 2:20-cv-0728 JAM CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER BECKER, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 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 January 11, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice that he could file objections to the findings and recommendations. The time for filing objections has passed and plaintiff has not filed objections. 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). Having reviewed the file, the court 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 filed January 11, 2021 are adopted in full; and 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice.

DATED: March 19, 2021 /s/ John A. Mendez THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(PC) Pile v. Becker, (E.D. Cal. 2021).

(PC) Pile v. Becker ((PC) Pile v. Becker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alumino-Thermic Corp. v. Goldschmidt Thermit Co.
25 F.2d 206 (Third Circuit, 1928)