Maxum Investments, LP v. Mlivic et al
Filing
8
ORDER adopting 4 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 2/6/15: The action is remanded to the Sacramento County Superior Court. The Clerk of Court shall serve a certified copy of this order on the Clerk of the Sacramento County Superior Court, and reference the state case number (14UD06730) in the proof of service. The Clerk of Court shall close this case. (Kaminski, H)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MAXUM INVESTMENTS, LP,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 2:15-cv-29-KJM-KJN PS
v.
ORDER
MIRELA MLIVIC, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
On January 8, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations (ECF No.
17
18
4), which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the
19
findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. No objections were
20
filed.
21
Therefore, the court presumes that any findings of fact are correct and decides the matter
22
on the applicable law. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The
23
magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified
24
School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having carefully reviewed the file, the court
25
finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
26
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
27
1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 4) are ADOPTED.
28
2. The action is remanded to the Sacramento County Superior Court.
1
1
3. The Clerk of Court shall serve a certified copy of this order on the Clerk of the
2
Sacramento County Superior Court, and reference the state case number (14UD06730) in the
3
proof of service.
4
5
4. The Clerk of Court shall close this case.
DATED: February 6, 2015.
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?