(PC) Singh v. Sacramento County Sheriff RCCC ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GURPREET SINGH, No. 2:23-cv-0415-DJC-KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF RCCC, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner 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 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On August 17, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations 21 herein which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any 22 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen 23 days. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 25 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The Magistrate Judge’s conclusions of law 26 are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 27 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and 28 1 | recommendations to be supported by the record and by the Magistrate Judge’s 2 | analysis. In addition, the Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s June 30, 2023 3 | Order (ECF No. 11) which the Court finds is also supported by the record and the 4 | proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations filed August 17, 2023, are adopted in 7 | full; and 8 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. 9 | P. 41(b). 10 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 | Dated: _ October 6, 2023 _ Bek | Cbabeatin.. Hon. Daniel labretta 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28