(PS) Murphy v. Farmers Insurance Company ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SHANNON O. MURPHY ESQ. SR., dba No. 2:20-cv-1456 KJM DB PS SHEETMETAL & ASSOCIATES, 12 13 Plaintiff, ORDER 14 v. 15 FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY, 16 Defendant. 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c)(21). 20 On January 11, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 21 were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days after service of the findings and 23 recommendations. The thirty-day period has expired, and plaintiff has not filed any objections to 24 the findings and recommendations. 25 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 26 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 27 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 28 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 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 HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 11, 2021 (ECF No. 4) are adopted in 5 | full; and 6 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. 7 || DATED: March 25, 2021. 8 9 ( ti / ¢ q_/ 10 CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28