From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. Carbullido

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 21, 2023
2:19-cv-2550 KJM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2023)

Opinion

2:19-cv-2550 KJM CKD P

12-21-2023

KENNETH LEE TAYLOR, Plaintiff, v. J. CARBULLIDO, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has 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 October 6, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has 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) (“[Determinations 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. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted as to any remining denial of access to court's claim; and

2. This case is closed.


Summaries of

Taylor v. Carbullido

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 21, 2023
2:19-cv-2550 KJM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2023)
Case details for

Taylor v. Carbullido

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH LEE TAYLOR, Plaintiff, v. J. CARBULLIDO, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Dec 21, 2023

Citations

2:19-cv-2550 KJM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2023)