(PS) Flynn v. County of Tuolumne

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 JOHN FLYNN, Case No. 2:24-cv-2265-DJC-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 COUNTY OF TUOLUMNE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 18 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On February 26, 2025, the Magistrate Judge 19 filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff and which 20 contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be 21 filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed. 22 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 23 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The Magistrate Judge’s conclusions of law 24 are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) 25 (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the 26 district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the Court finds 27 the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper 28 1 | analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed February 26, 2025, are 4 | ADOPTED; 5 2. Plaintiff's applications to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2 & 4, are 6 | DENIED; 7 3. Plaintiff's request to grant his application to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF 8 | No. 5, is DENIED; 9 4. Plaintiff is given twenty-one days from the date of this order to pay the filing 10 | fee of $405; and 11 5. This matter is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for all further 12 | pretrial matters. 13 15 | Dated: _April 18, 2025 “Daniel CoD tto— Hon. Daniel □□ |. Cod 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28