(PC) Barksdale v. Juan ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHARLES BARKSDALE, No. 2:19-cv-02071-KJM-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 JUAN, 15 Defendant. 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 October 15, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 21 were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed objections to 23 the findings and recommendations. 24 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, plaintiff 25 was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current 26 address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of 27 the party is fully effective. 28 //// 1 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 2 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 3 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 4 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 5 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 6 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 7 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 8 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 15, 2020, are adopted in full; and 9 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. 10 DATED: December 15, 2020. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28