Copeland v. Challenge Security Services Inc.

Filing 17

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 12/9/2020 ADOPTING 16 Findings and Recommendations in full. Plaintiff's 1 Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice; and The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.(Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ZUKEYNA COPELAND,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:18-cv-01435-TLN-CKD
ORDER

v.
CHALLENGE SECURITY SERVICES,
INC.,
Defendant.

16
17

Plaintiff is an individual proceeding pro se in this wage and hour action. The matter was

18
19

referred to the magistrate judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21).

20

On November 10, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

21

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

22

and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed.
Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v.

23
24

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

25

reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir.

26

1983).

27
28

The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing,
concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the Proposed Findings and Recommendations in full.
1

1
2

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Proposed Findings and Recommendations filed
October 06, 2020, are ADOPTED IN FULL, and:

3

1.

Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice; and

4

2.

The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6

DATED: December 9, 2020

7
8
9

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2