(PC) Linarez-Rodriguez v. Honea et al
Filing
57
ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 05/08/2024 ADOPTING 48 Findings and Recommendations in full and Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Foster and Perez are DISMISSED with prejudice. (Nair, C)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
RAUL DANIEL LINAREZRODRIGUEZ,
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
16
v.
No. 2:22-cv-01692 KJM CSK P
ORDER
KORY L. HONEA, et al.,
Defendants.
17
18
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, 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 February 2, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which
22
were served on all parties, and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the
23
findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party filed
24
objections to the 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 (ECF No. 48) are adopted in full; and
5
2. Plaintiff’s claims against defendants Foster and Perez are dismissed with prejudice.
6
DATED: May 8, 2024.
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?