(PC) Spence v. McCorkle

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GERALD SPENCE, No. 2:23-cv-0953-TLN-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 MCCORKLE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter 18 was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 19 Rule 302. 20 On October 23, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which 21 were served on all remaining parties and which contained notice that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 27 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court[.]”). 28 Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 1 | the record and by the proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 23, 2024, are adopted in full; and 4 2. This action is dismissed, and the Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. 5 | DATE: December 5, 2024 6 Lael Woy 8 9 TROY L. NUNLEY CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28