(PC) Taylor v. Cameron

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SHAUNTAE TAYLOR, Case No. 2:23-cv-2353-WBS-JDP (P) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 N. CAMERON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 19 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On April 15, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 21 were served on plaintiff, and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not 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 April 15, 2025 are adopted in full; 4 2. Plaintiffs motion to grant plaintiff's amended complaint and request for default, ECF 5 | No. 39, is DENIED as moot; 6 3. Plaintiff's motion to stay, ECF No. 48, is DENIED as moot; and 7 4. This action is closed due to plaintiff's failure to pay the filing fee as ordered by the 8 | court’s January 16, 2025 order. 9 | Dated: May 12, 2025 rb them. hd. bE—~ 10 WILLIAM B. SHUBB UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28