(PS) Peoples v. Navy Board Annex ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GARY D. PEOPLES, JR., No. 2:19-cv-02253-TLN-AC 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 NAVY BOARD ANNEX, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff Gary D. Peoples, Jr. (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an 18 action challenging a decision by the Department of the Navy’s Board for Correction of Naval 19 Records denying Plaintiff’s application to upgrade his discharge from “Other Than Honorable by 20 Reason of Misconduct.” The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 21 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 22 On April 21, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which were 23 served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings 24 and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. (ECF No. 27.) Plaintiff filed 25 objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 29.) Defendant filed a response to 26 the objections. (ECF No. 31.) 27 This Court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which 28 objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore 1 Business Machines, 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). As 2 to any portion of the proposed findings of fact to which no objection has been made, the Court 3 assumes its correctness and decides the motions on the applicable law. See Orand v. United 4 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 5 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified Sch. Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 6 Having carefully reviewed the entire file under the applicable legal standards, the Court finds the 7 Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s 8 analysis. 9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 10 1. The findings and recommendations filed April 21, 2020 (ECF No. 27), are ADOPTED 11 in full; and 12 2. The Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 20) is GRANTED, without leave to amend. 13 3. The Motion to Dismiss at (ECF No. 25) is DENIED as moot. 14 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 DATED: June 15, 2020 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28