(PS) Lorretz v. Kushner ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DIANA LEE WALLACH LORRETZ, No. 2:19-cv-01969-TLN-DB 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 MR. AND MRS. JARED KUSHNER, 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Diana Lee Wallach Lorretz (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se with the above- 18 entitled action. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local 19 Rule 302(c)(21). 20 On April 2, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which were 21 served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within thirty days after service of the findings and 23 recommendations. (ECF No. 7.) The thirty-day period has expired, and Plaintiff has not filed 24 any objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 26 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 27 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 28 1983); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 1 Having reviewed the file under the applicable legal standards, the Court finds the Findings 2 and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed April 2, 2020 (ECF No. 7), are adopted in 5 full; 6 2. Plaintiff’s September 27, 2019 Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 2) 7 is DENIED; 8 3. Plaintiff’s September 27, 2019 Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED without 9 prejudice; 10 4. This action is DISMISSED; and 11 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 DATED: July 6, 2020 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28