(PC) Goins v. Bobbla ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RAYMOND LEE GOINS, No. 2:18-cv-0034-TLN-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 A. DIMACULANGAN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Raymond Lee Goins (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil 18 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 and is before the Court on 20 Defendant Ashok N. Veeranki’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 64). Plaintiff filed 21 an opposition (ECF No. 73) and Defendant replied (ECF No. 75). 22 On January 9, 2020, the magistrate judge assigned to this case filed Findings and 23 Recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all 24 parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen 25 days. (ECF No. 80.) Neither party filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 26 /// 27 /// 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 January 9, 2020 (ECF No. 80), are adopted 9 in full; 10 2. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 64) is DENIED; and 11 3. Defendant shall file his Answer within fourteen days. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: March 6, 2020 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28