(PC) Love v. Peery ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANGELO M. LOVE, No. 2:20-cv-01489-TLN-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 SUZANNE M. PEERY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Angelo M. Love (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this 18 civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On January 27, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 11.) Plaintiff has 23 not filed objections to 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 Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983); see also 28 27 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 28 /// 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 January 21, 2021 (ECF No. 11), are 5 | ADOPTED IN FULL; 6 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice; and 7 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 | DATED: March 19, 2021 10 { J) /) ll “, J Vu 12 Troy L. Nuhlep ] B United States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28