Crawford v. Hall

Full title: DONALD CRAWFORD, Plaintiff, v. WE HALL, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 19, 2005

No. CIV S-04-2452 WBS KJM PS (E.D. Cal. Sep. 19, 2005)

Opinion

No. CIV S-04-2452 WBS KJM PS.

September 19, 2005

ORDER

WILLIAM SHUBB, Chief Judge, District

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the above-entitled actions. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).

On August 16, 2005, 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 ten days. Plaintiff has filed a notice which the court construes as objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed August 16, 2005, are adopted in full; and

2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).