(PS) McCoy v. Becker ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES R. MCCOY, No. 2:19-cv-00680-TLN-KJN 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 BECKER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff James R. McCoy (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this 18 civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On September 11, 2019, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (ECF No. 7.) No objections to the 23 Findings and Recommendations have been filed. 24 Although it appears from the file that Plaintiff’s copy of the Findings and 25 Recommendations was returned, Plaintiff was properly served. It is Plaintiff’s responsibility to 26 keep the Court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service 27 of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. 28 /// 1 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 2 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 3 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 4 1983); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 5 Having reviewed the file under the applicable legal standards, the Court finds the Findings 6 and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 7 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 8 1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed on September 11, 2019 (ECF No. 7), are 9 adopted in full; and 10 2. This action is DISMISSED, without prejudice, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 11 Procedure 41(b). 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: November 12, 2019 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28