(PS) Cohen v. Coleman

Opinion

County Of Sacramento, et al., No. 2:23-cv-02666-KJM-CKD Plaintiffs, v. ORDER Jacqueline Coleman, et al., Defendants.

On February 1, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties, and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. That period having passed, plaintiff has not objected 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 (ECF No. 3) are adopted in full; 2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is DENIED AS MOOT; 3. The action is remanded for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to remove the County of Sacramento from this action and recaption this action “Cynthia Cohen v. Jaqueline Coleman, et al.”; and 5. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. DATED: March 27, 2024. "1 CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE