(PS) Brewer v. California State Bar et al

Filing 51

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 03/10/25 ADOPTING 48 Findings and Recommendations in full and DENYING 43 Motion for Preliminary Injunction without prejudice to renewal. This matter is REFERRED back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial matters. (Deputy Clerk VLC)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TERRENCE BREWER,

12
13
14
15

Case No. 2:23-cv-0860-TLN-JDP

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

CALIFORNIA STATE BAR, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

On February 12, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

18

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

19

and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff filed objections on

20

February 24, 2025, and they were considered by the undersigned.

21

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

22

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

23

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

24

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

25

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

26

the record and by the proper analysis.

27

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

28

1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations (ECF No. 48) filed February 12, 2025,
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

are adopted;
2. Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief (ECF No. 43) is DENIED without prejudice to
renewal; and
3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial
matters.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: March 10, 2025

8
9
10
11

___________________________________
TROY L. NUNLEY
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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