(PS) Mehl v. Green

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GAVIN MEHL, et al., No. 2:21-cv-01861-TLN-JDP 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. ORDER 14 WARREN GREEN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On June 6, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 18 were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 19 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed objections on August 15, 20 2023, and they were considered by the undersigned. 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 June 6, 2023 (ECF No. 58) are 3 ADOPTED IN FULL; 4 2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 44) is GRANTED; 5 3. Plaintiffs’ second amended complaint (ECF No. 43) is DISMISSED without leave to 6 amend; and 7 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. 8 | Date: August 23, 2023 9 /) 10 “ Lu

12 United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28