King v. Cappel et al

Filing 6

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 10/1/2019 ADOPTING in FULL 5 Findings and Recommendations. The Complaint is DISMISSED pursuant to 28:1915A(b), and this case is closed. CASE CLOSED (Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ALFRED KING,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:18-cv-0389 KJM AC P

v.

ORDER

R.W. CAPPEL, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief

17
18

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided

19

by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

20

On September 4, 2019, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, which

21

were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings

22

and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No. 5. Plaintiff has not filed

23

objections to the findings and recommendations.
The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United

24
25

States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are

26

reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations

27

of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate]

28

/////
1

1

court . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be

2

supported by the record and by the proper analysis.

3
4

1. The findings and recommendations issued September 4, 2019 (ECF No. 5) are
ADOPTED in full;

5

2. The complaint is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), and

6

3. This case is CLOSED.

7

DATED: October 1, 2019.

8
9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2