(PS) Chiu v. President of US

District Court, E.D. California·Decided January 16, 2024·No. 2:23-cv-00835·Unknown

Opinion

TAIFUSIN CHIU, Case No. 2:23-cv-00835-DJC-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Defendants. Plaintiff is proceeding in this action in pro per. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). On December 6, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff, and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed. 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 proposed Findings and Recommendations filed December 6, 2023, are ADOPTED; 2. Plaintiff's first amended complaint, ECF No. 3, is dismissed without leave to amend; and 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. Dated: _ January 12, 2024 “Dane A Ch brett Hon. Daniel alabretta UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(PS) Chiu v. President of US, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

(PS) Chiu v. President of US ((PS) Chiu v. President of US) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Donald Milton Orand v. United States
602 F.2d 207 (Ninth Circuit, 1979)
Arthur Robbins, III v. Tom L. Carey
481 F.3d 1143 (Ninth Circuit, 2007)