Opinion
2:22-cv-1389-KJM-KJN P
07-24-2023
KARL WILLIAM DEVELTER, Plaintiff, v. CRAVEN, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On May 24, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Plaintiff did not file objections to the findings and recommendations.
Although it appears from the file that plaintiff's copy of the findings and recommendations was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.
The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed May 24, 2023, are adopted in full; and
2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).