From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Anderson v. Unknown

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 29, 2021
2:21-cv-0749 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 29, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-cv-0749 JAM CKD P

07-29-2021

ERIZ Z. ANDERSON, Plaintiff, v. UNKNOWN, Defendant.


ORDER

HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE.

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, is proceeding pro se. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On June 14, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 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 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 Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed June 14, 2021 are adopted in full; and
2. This action is dismissed without prejudice.


Summaries of

Anderson v. Unknown

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 29, 2021
2:21-cv-0749 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 29, 2021)
Case details for

Anderson v. Unknown

Case Details

Full title:ERIZ Z. ANDERSON, Plaintiff, v. UNKNOWN, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jul 29, 2021

Citations

2:21-cv-0749 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 29, 2021)