(PS) Grant v. Corral ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARK A. GRANT, No. 2:19-cv-01495-MCE-CKD PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 MICHAEL CORRAL, et al. 15 Defendants. 16 17 On March 4, 2021, the magistrate judge filed amended findings and recommendations 18 (ECF No. 54), which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to 19 the amended findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. No 20 objections were filed. Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See 21 Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of 22 law are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th 23 Cir. 1983). 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, 2 || concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the findings and recommendations in full. 3 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 4 1. The amended findings and recommendations (ECF No. 54) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 5 2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 47) is GRANTED; 6 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment for defendants and close this case. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 | Dated: June 15, 2021 Mater LEK hu rfl ASX, Xe: SENIOR UNITED STATES URTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28