(PC) Ruiz v. Bodukam ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROGELIO MAY RUIZ, No. 2:19-cv-00146-TLN-DMC 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 VIJAY BODUKAM, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Rogelio May Ruiz (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this 18 civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On October 16, 2019, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which 21 were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 16.) Neither 23 party has filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations. 24 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 25 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 26 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 27 1983); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 28 /// 1 Having reviewed the file under the applicable legal standards, the Court finds the Findings 2 and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed October 16, 2019 (ECF No. 16), are adopted 5 in full; 6 2. Defendants’ unopposed Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 15) is GRANTED; 7 3. Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED, with leave to amend; and 8 4. Plaintiff shall file a First Amended Complaint within 30 days of the date of this order. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 11 Dated: January 6, 2020 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28