(PS)Tanksley v. Department of Motor Vehicle ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MOODY WOODROW TANKSLEY, No. 2:20-cv-01732-TLN-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Moody Woodrow Tanksley (“Plaintiff”), an individual proceeding pro se, has 18 filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a 19 United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On December 8, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 4.) No objections were 23 filed. 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 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983); see also 28 27 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 28 /// 1 Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the findings and 2 recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The Proposed Order and Findings and Recommendations filed December 8, 2020 5 (ECF No. 4), are ADOPTED IN FULL: 6 2. The original Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice; and 7 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 DATED: January 14, 2021 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28