(PC) Watson v. Sacramento County Sheriffs Office ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTOPHER P. WATSON, No. 2:22-cv-1681 WBS KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff, a Sacramento County Jail inmate proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action 19 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 20 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On November 29, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 22 which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the 23 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff has not filed 24 objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 26 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 27 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having 28 //// 1 | reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record 2 | and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed November 29, 2022, are adopted in full; and 5 2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 6 | Dated: December 29, 2022 / 4 . ak. 2 7 WILLIAMB.SHUBB | g UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Q | Awats22cv1681.800 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28