(PS) Favis v. Favis

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 STEPHEN FAVIS, Case No. 2:25-cv-1083-TLN-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 MICHAEL JOSEPH FAVIR, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On May 9, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 18 were served Plaintiff Stephen Favis (“Plaintiff”), and which contained notice that any objections 19 to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were 20 filed. 21 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 22 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 23 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 24 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). 25 Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 26 the record and by the proper analysis. 27 /// 28 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed May 9, 2025, are adopted in full; 3 2. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 4) is dismissed without leave to amend for 4 lack of subject matter jurisdiction; and 5 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Date: June 17, 2025 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28