Travenia v. Woodland City et al

Filing 48

ORDER ADOPTING in FULL 47 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 2/1/08. Dfts' motion for summary judgment filed 11/5/07 is DENIED; and this case is DISMISSED pursuant to Fed R. Civ. P.41(b) due to pltf's failure to prosecute this action. CASE CLOSED(Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
(PS)Travenia v. Woodland City et al Doc. 48 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. WOODLAND CITY, et al., Defendants. __________________________________/ On December 21, 2007, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. No objections were filed. Accordingly, the court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orland v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1999). The magistrate judge's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the Findings and Recommendations in full. \\\\\ 1 Dockets.Justia.com IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KAREN TRAVENIA, Plaintiff, No. 06-cv-02498-MCE-GGH PS ORDER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed December 21, 2007, are ADOPTED; 2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment filed November 5, 2007, is DENIED; 3. This case is DISMISSED pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) due to plaintiff's failure to prosecute this action. Dated: February 1, 2008 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?