(PC) Smith v. CDCR ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL LENOIR SMITH, No. 2:18-cv-2942 KJM AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND 15 REHABILITATION, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has 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 March 30, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations with respect 22 to plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order. The findings and recommendations were 23 served on plaintiff and contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and 24 recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No. 21. Plaintiff has not filed 25 objections to the findings and recommendations. 26 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 27 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 28 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 1 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 2 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 3 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 30, 2020, are adopted in full; and 6 2. Plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order, ECF No. 18, is denied without 7 prejudice. 8 DATED: May 5, 2020. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28