(PC)Myers v. California Correctional Healthcare Services ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MICHAEL CRAIG MYERS, No. 2:20-cv-0561 KJM DB P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL HEALTHCARE SERVICES, 14 Defendant. 15 16 17 Plaintiff is a state inmate proceeding pro se with an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 18 Plaintiff alleges his rights were violated when a laptop that may have contained some of his 19 personal information was stolen. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as 20 provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On September 8, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 22 were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings 23 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. F&R, ECF No. 10. Plaintiff has not 24 filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 26 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 27 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 28 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 1 | ....°). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 || supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed September 8, 2020, are adopted in full; 5 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice; and 6 3. The clerk of court close this case. 7 || DATED: February 23, 2021. (] g l ti / { g_/ 9 CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28