(PS) Nasiri v. Pfizer, Inc.

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ZABIULLAH NASIRI. No. 2:24-cv-2111-KJM-CKD (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 PFIZER, INC., 15 Defendant. 16

17 18 This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge under Local Rule 302(c)(21). 19 On April 17, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which contained 20 notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen 21 days. Plaintiff has not objected to the findings and recommendations. 22 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 23 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 24 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 25 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 26 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 27 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 28 ///// ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed April 7, 2025 (ECF No. 6), are adopted in 3 full. 4 2. This action is dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 5 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 6 || DATED: May 15, 2025.

8 = | ¥ FU/ Fees 5 STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28