(PS) Lewis v. Wellspace Health ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DERRICK JEROME LEWIS, No. 2:20-cv-330-KJM-EFB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 WELLSPACE HEALTH ORGANIZATION; WESTCARE; MIKE 15 LEMASTER, 16 Defendants. 17 18 On May 14, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 19 served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 20 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were filed.1 21 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 22 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 23 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 24 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 25 ///// 26 1 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the findings and 27 recommendations was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service 28 of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. 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 ORDERED that: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed May 14, 2020, are ADOPTED; and 5 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim as set forth in 6 the March 20, 2020 order (ECF No. 3). 7 DATED: June 10, 2020. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28