(PS) Hassouna v. Regents of the University of CA

Opinion

JENNIFER LORRAINE HASSOUNA, No. 2:20-cv-02179-TLN-JDP Plaintiff, v. ORDER CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On June 30, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 5.) Plaintiff has not filed objections 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 filed June 30, 2022 CECF No. 5) are ADOPTED in full; 2. This action is DISMISSED for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, and failure to state a claim for the reasons set forth in the November 9, 2021 Order (ECF No. 3); and 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. DATED: August 18, 2022 /) “ \/ of du — □□ _Z Troy L. Nunley } United States District Judge