(PC) Davis v. Lynch ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MAURICE DARONTE DAVIS, No. 2:23-cv-0845-DJC-KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 JEFF LYNCH, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking 18 relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On August 29, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations 21 herein which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff did not file 23 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 recommendations to be supported by the record and by the Magistrate Judge’s 1 | analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations filed August 29, 2023, are adopted in 4 | full; 5 2. All claims in the first amended complaint against defendant Lynch, but for 6 | the three claims found potentially colorable in the screening order (ECF No. 9), and all 7 | claims against defendant Newsom are dismissed. 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 | Dated: _ November 1, 2023 Bek | Cbabeatin.. Hon. Daniel labretta 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 || /davi23cv0845.801 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28