(PS) Lewis v. Glick ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DERRICK JEROME LEWIS, No. 2:20-cv-00346-TLN-EFB 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 JAMES GLICK; SAFETYNET WIRELESS; GINA THOMAS; VINCENT 15 THOMAS; and ERNEST MUNIUZ, 16 Defendants. 17 18 On May 14, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 19 were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 20 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed.1 21 Accordingly, the Court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orland v. United 22 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1999). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 23 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 24 The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, 25 concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the proposed Findings and Recommendations in full. 26 1 Although it appears from the file that Plaintiff’s copy of the findings and 27 recommendations was returned, Plaintiff was properly served. It is Plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the Court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service 28 of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. 1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 2 1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed May 14, 2020, are ADOPTED IN 3 FULL; and 4 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim as set forth in 5 the March 20, 2020 order (ECF No. 3). 6 DATED: June 15, 2020 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28