Opinion
2:23-cv-00400-KJM-CKD (PS)
05-02-2023
MICHAEL LITTLETON, Plaintiffs, v. SACRAMENTO CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c)(21). On March 24, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. ECF No. 3. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
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 and adopts the magistrate judge's conclusion that plaintiff has failed to state a claim. While the court acknowledges plaintiff's statements that he is in distress, and is not unsympathetic, the court cannot resolve plaintiff's claims as a matter of law. The court notes the existence of community resources that may be able to offer some assistance to plaintiff. For example, plaintiff may wish to visit Legal Services of Northern California at 517 12th Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Plaintiff may also wish to visit Wellspace Health at 1820 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95811, Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. The findings and recommendations filed March 24, 2023 (ECF No. 3) are adopted in full;
2. Plaintiff's complaint (ECF No. 1) is dismissed without leave to amend for failure to state a claim; and
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.