(PC) Ford v. Cassol ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LARRY FORD, No. 2:20-cv-02087-KJM-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 MATTHEW CASSOL, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided 19 by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On January 19, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 21 were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 25 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 26 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 27 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 28 ///// 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: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed January 19, 2023, are adopted in full. 5 2. Defendant’s April 14, 2022 motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 47) is DENIED. 6 3. Referral to the assigned magistrate judge is withdrawn absent further order of the court. 7 4. This matter is referred to the court’s ADR and Pro Bono Director, Sujean Park, to 8 || attempt to locate pro bono counsel soon for the limited purpose of representing plaintiff at a 9 || settlement conference to be set by subsequent order of the court. 10 | DATED: March 20, 2023. 1] 12 B CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28