(PC) Good v. Diaz ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RAVON GOOD, No. 2:19-cv-02453-TLN-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 RALPH DIAZ, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Ravon Good (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil 18 rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On September 2, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 20.) Plaintiff has 23 not filed objections to the findings and recommendations.1 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 27 1 On September 24, 2020, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” However, Plaintiff does not identify any objections in 28 that document. 1 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983); see also 28 2 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 3 The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 4 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations filed September 2, 2020 (ECF No. 20), are 7 ADOPTED IN FULL; 8 2. Plaintiff’s second amended complaint (ECF No. 19) is DISMISSED for failure to state 9 a claim upon which relief can be granted; and 10 3. This case is closed. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 DATED: October 6, 2020 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28