(PC) Thompson v. Baughman ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROMONTE J. THOMPSON, No. 2:20-cv-0132 KJM CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 DAVID BAUGHMAN, 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 as provided 19 by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On May 5, 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 fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the 23 findings and recommendations. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 25 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 26 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 27 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 28 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 1 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED 2 that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations filed May 5, 2020 are adopted in full; 4 2. All claims other than a claim for excessive force arising under the Eighth Amendment 5 against defendant Nicholson and all other defendants are dismissed; and 6 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial 7 proceedings. 8 DATED: August 12, 2020. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28