(PS) Bird v. Bonta

Opinion

Donald M. Bird, No. 2:23-cv-00525 KJM DB PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER Rob Bonta, Attorney General State of California, Defendant, Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c)(21). On December 21, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on all parties, and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days after service of the findings and recommendations. The time for filing objections has expired, and no party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 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 Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court ....°). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 21, 2023 (ECF No. 21) are adopted in full; 2. Defendant’s May 1, 2023 motion to dismiss (ECF No. 7) is granted; 3. The complaint filed March 20, 2023 (ECF No. 1) is dismissed without leave to amend; and 4. This action is closed. DATED: March 21, 2024.

CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

\bird0525.jo