(PS) Foster v. Roseville Dept. FBI ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARTIN LEE FOSTER, No. 2:22-cv-00943-TLN-KJN 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 ROSEVILLE FBI, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On June 9, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, (ECF No. 3), 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 (14) days. No objections were filed. 20 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 21 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 22 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 23 1983). 24 The Court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, 25 concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the findings and recommendations in full. 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations, (ECF No. 3), are adopted in full; 3 2. Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, (ECF No. 2), is DENIED as moot; 4 3. The action is frivolous and therefore DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; 5 and 6 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 7 | DATED: July 22, 2022 8 / ° “ \/ of du 10 — □□ _Z Troy L. Nunley } 1] United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28