Corral v. Warren et al

Filing 85

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 12/20/2023 DENYING 76 Motion for Settlement. (Clemente Licea, O)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DYLAN SCOTT CORRAL, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 WARREN, et al., 15 No. 2:18-cv-0024-TLN-CKD ORDER Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed a civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 18 The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) 19 and Local Rule 302. 20 On November 2, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on all parties, and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed 27 the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 28 the magistrate judge’s analysis. 1 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion that the Court order 2 Defendants to pay Plaintiff $1,050 (ECF No. 76) is DENIED. 3 Date: December 20, 2023 4 5 Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge 6 7 8 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?