(PC) Poynter v. Peterson ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARKICE POYNTER, No. 2:21-cv-0012-KJM-EFB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 B. PETERSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 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 19, 2021, 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 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 Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 27 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). 28 ///// 1 Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 2 the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 19, 2021, are adopted in full; 5 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice for the reasons set forth in the September 7, 6 2021 screening order (ECF No. 18); and 7 3. The clerk of court is directed to close this case. 8 DATED: December 16, 2021. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28