(PS) DeCheri Hafer v. Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency

Opinion

DECHERI HAFER, No. 2:22-cv-01370-KJM-CKD (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, ET AL., Defendant.

On April 18, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, ECF No. 12, which were served on plaintiff 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. Although it appears plaintiff’s copy of the findings and recommendations was returned due to insufficient address, plaintiff was properly served. A pro se party has a duty to keep the court apprised of its current address. E.D. Cal. L.R. 183(b). In accordance with Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. 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. 12) are adopted in full; 2. Plaintiffs claims are DISMISSED without prejudice under Local Rule 183(b); 3. Plaintiffs pending motion to vacate (ECF No. 10) is denied as moot; and 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. DATED: July 11, 2023. eee CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE