(PS) Miller v. Sacramento City Unified School District ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SONIA MAREE MILLER, No. 2:21-cv-0757-JAM-CKD PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED (ECF No. 34) SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 On January 4, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations (ECF 19 No. 34), which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the 20 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. No objections were 21 filed. Accordingly, the court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 22 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 23 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 24 1983). 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. Accordingly, 3 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 34) are ADOPTED IN FULL; 5 2. All claims against the only remaining defendant, Sacramento City Unified School District, 6 are DISMISSED with prejudice both under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) and for failure to state a 7 claim, for the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s October 14, 2021 Findings and 8 Recommendations (ECF No. 29); and 9 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 10 11 Dated: February 11, 2022 /s/ John A. Mendez 12 THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28