(PS)Douglas v. Walt Disney ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANJON MAREQUIS DOUGLAS, No. 2:23-cv-2328-TLN-AC 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 WALT DISNEY 20TH CENTURY FOX STUDIOS, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled action. The matter was referred to a 18 United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). 19 On October 18, 2023 the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 20 were served on Plaintiff, and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the 21 findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. (ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff 22 has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 24 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 25 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed 26 the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 27 the magistrate judge’s analysis. 28 /// 1 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 18, 2023 (ECF No. 3) are 4 ADOPTED IN FULL; 5 2. The Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice; and 6 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 7 Date: December 4, 2023 8 /) ? “ \/ bln 10 LN Troy L. Nunley } 11 United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28