(PS) Graham v. U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARK E. GRAHAM, No. 2:19-cv-02429-TLN-JDP 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On February 18, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 18 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 19 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 33.) No objections were 20 filed. 21 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 22 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 23 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 24 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). 25 Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 26 the record and by the proper analysis. 27 /// 28 /// 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed February 18, 2022, are adopted in full; and 3 2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 27), is DENIED. 4 | DATED: March 25, 2022 5 ry /) 6 “ the 7 Troy L. Nuhlep> 8 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28