(PC) Gomes v. Mathis ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 LAWRENCE E. GOMES, No. 2:19-CV-1499-KJM-DMC-P 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. ORDER 15 MARIANA LOTASZTAIN, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff, a former prisoner proceeding pro se, brought this civil rights action under 19 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 20 Eastern District of California local rules. Defendants filed a suggestion of plaintiff’s death on 21 August 5, 2021, ECF No. 69, and since that time no one has substituted into the case on his 22 behalf. 23 On November 30, 2021, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, 24 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections 25 within the time specified therein. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been 26 filed. 27 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 28 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 1 || reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations 2 || of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] 3 || court....”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 4 || supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations filed November 30, 2021, are adopted 7 | in full; 8 2. This action is dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1); and 9 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this file. 10 | DATED: January 7, 2022. 11 12 ee 3 CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28