(PS) Giddens v. Becerra ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD GIDDENS, No. 2:19-cv-01263-TLN-DB 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 XAVIER BECERRA, in his official ORDER capacity as Attorney General of the State of 15 California; and SOLANO COUNTY, 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff Richard Giddens (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se with the above-entitled action. 19 The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). 20 On December 15, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days after service of the findings and 23 recommendations. (ECF No. 26.) The time for filing objections has expired and no party has 24 filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 26 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 27 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 28 /// 1 The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 || supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed December 15, 2020 (ECF No. 26), are 5 | ADOPTED IN FULL; 6 2. Defendant Xavier Becerra’s March 11, 2020 Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 21) is 7 | GRANTED; 8 3. Defendant Solano County’s March 11, 2020 Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 22) is 9 | GRANTED; 10 4. The First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 20) is DISMISSED without further leave to 11 amend; and 12 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 | DATED: March 17, 2021 /) San Toke 18 Troy L. Nunley . } United States District Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28