(PS) Van Den Heuvel v. Dorothy

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEAN MARC VAN DEN HEUVEL, No. 2:21-cv-02176-TLN-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 DOROTHY, et al., 15 Defendant. 16 17 On December 13, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 18 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 19 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed. 20 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 21 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 22 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 23 1983). 24 The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, 25 concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the Proposed Findings and Recommendations in full. 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 2 1. The Proposed Findings and Recommendations filed December 13, 2022, are 3 | ADOPTED; 4 2. The action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and 5 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. 6 | DATED: January 30, 2023 /) “ / eben

10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28