(PC)Rivera v. Suisun City Police Department et al

Filing 22

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/4/2020 ADOPTING 21 the Findings and Recommendations filed 6/24/2020, in full; DISMISSING Plaintiff's claims against defendants Suisun City Police Department, O'Brien, Zaragoza, and Heine without prejudice; and REFERRING this matter back to the magistrate judge for all further proceedings.(Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JASON RIVERA,

12
13
14
15
16

No. 2:19-cv-0920-KJM-EFB P
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER

SUISUN CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT,
et al.,
Defendants.

17
18

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

19

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

20

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

21

On June 24, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were

22

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

23

recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the

24

findings and recommendations.

25

The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States,

26

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

27

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

28

by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court
1

1

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

2

supported by the record and by the proper analysis.

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

4

1. The findings and recommendations filed June 24, 2020, are adopted in full;

5

2. Plaintiff’s claims against defendants Suisun City Police Department, O’Brien,

6
7

Zaragoza, and Heine are dismissed without prejudice; and
3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further

8

proceedings.

9

DATED: September 4, 2020.

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