(PC) Lopez v. Unknown

Filing 7

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 11/16/2021 ADOPTING in FULL #6 Findings and Recommendations. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice to plaintiff's filing a petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. Section 2254. CASE CLOSED(Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

JOSE FRANKIN LOPEZ,

11
12
13
14

No. 2: 21-cv-1716 KJM KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

UNKNOWN,
Defendants.

15
16

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

17

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

18

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

19

On October 4, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which

20

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

21

and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff did not file objections to the

22

findings and recommendations.

23

The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602

24

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

25

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

26

magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”).

27

Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by

28

the record and by the proper analysis.
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed October 4, 2021, are adopted in full; and

3

2. This action is dismissed without prejudice to plaintiff’s filing a petition for habeas

4

corpus under 28 U.S.C. Section 2254.

5

DATED: November 16, 2021.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2