(PC) Hesse v. County of Sacramento ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL HESSE, No. 2:21-cv-1931 WBS KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking relief 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 19 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On February 08, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on all parties, and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having 27 reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record 28 and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 61) are adopted in full; 3 2. The September 29, 2023 motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 46) is granted; 4 3. Defendants County of Sacramento, Lynn Billet, Phoebe Food, and Dr. Andrew Ho are 5 || dismissed from this action with prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); and 6 4. This action remains pending as to defendant Dr. Sanga. 7 | Dated: March 21, 2024 dd Cleaw~ 7th. dk Z 8 WILLIAMB.SHUBB | 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 |] mess21cv1931.801 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28