(PS) Machado v. Lizarraga ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JUANITA MACHADO, No. 2:17-cv-02430-TLN-CKD 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 J.A. LIZARRAGA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Juanita Machado (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 18 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 09, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 21 were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. (ECF No. 73.) The 23 time for filing objections has expired, and no party has filed objections to the findings and 24 recommendations. 25 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 26 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 27 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 28 1983); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 1 Having reviewed the file under the applicable legal standards, the Court finds the Findings 2 and Recommendations to be 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 July 09, 2020 (ECF No. 73), are adopted in 5 full; 6 2. Plaintiff’s Request for Judicial Notice (ECF No. 66) is GRANTED in part and 7 DENIED in part as set forth in the Findings and Recommendations; 8 3. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 59) is GRANTED; and 9 4. Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED with prejudice; and 10 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 DATED: November 2, 2020 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28