(PC) Stine v. Bureau of Prisons

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 MIKEAL GLENN STINE, No. 2:18-cv-00684-TLN-KJN 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Mikael Glenn Stine (“Plaintiff”), federal prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this 18 civil action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 19 403 U.S. 388 (1971). The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 20 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On December 16, 2019, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which 22 were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the findings 23 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 55.) Plaintiff has not filed 24 objections to the Findings and Recommendations. 25 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 26 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 27 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 28 1983); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 1 Having reviewed the file under the applicable legal standards, the Court finds the Findings 2 and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 16, 2019, are adopted in full; 5 2. Plaintiff’s motions to withdraw the voluntary dismissal and to reopen this action (ECF 6 Nos. 49, 50) are denied; and 7 3. This action shall remain closed. 9 Dated: January 15, 2020 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28