(PC)Trehearne v. Amador County

Opinion

THOMAS TREHEARNE, No. 2:22-cv-00254-TLN-DB Plaintiff, v. ORDER Defendants. Plaintiff is a former1 county inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 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 October 25, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff, and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. (ECF No. 20.) Plaintiff

1 Review of the Amador County inmate locator website indicates that plaintiff is no longer in custody. The Court may take judicial notice of information stored on Amador County’s inmate locator website. See In re Yahoo Mail Litig., 7 F. Supp. 3d 1016, 1024 (N.D. Cal. 2014) (a court may take judicial notice of information on “publicly accessible websites” not subject to reasonable dispute); Louis v. McCormick Schmick Restaurant Corp., 460 F. Supp. 2d 1153, 1155 fn. 4 (C.D. Cal. 2006) (a court may take judicial notice of state agency records). Plaintiff has not updated his address with the Court as required by Eastern District of California Local Rule 182(f). has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The Court reviewed the file and 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 October 25, 2023 (ECF No. 20) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 2. This action is DISMISSED pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b); 3. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 11) 1s DISMISSED as moot; and 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. Date: December 20, 2023 /) “ \/ thu — □□ Z Troy L. Nunley } United States District Judge