(PC) Michoff v. El Dorado County ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 STEVEN DAVID MICHOFF, No. 2:17-CV-02584-MCE-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 EL DORADO COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 19 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On April 29, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 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. 26. Neither party 23 has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having 27 reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record 28 and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. WAS Got fb OUVO YVOT WINS LY INEZ MVOC CO PNR Vey OY eve 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed April 29, 2020 (ECF No. 26), are ADOPTED 3 | in full; 4 2. Defendant Ragusano is DISMISSED from this action without prejudice; and 5 3. This action will proceed against defendants Colburn, Cooney, and Morton. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 8 || Dated: June 16, 2020 9 □ 10 MORRISON C. he UNITED STATES DISTRI 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28