Opinion
2:19-cv-01663-TLN-KJN
07-30-2021
CHARLES HEAD, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al, Defendants.
ORDER
TROY L NUNLEY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Charles Head (“Plaintiff”), a prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil action. 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 3, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 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. (ECF No. 67.) Neither party has filed timely 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).
The Court has reviewed the file and 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 3, 2021 (ECF No. 67), are ADOPTED IN FULL;
2. Defendant Kenneth Shelton's (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 54) is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs state law claim and DENIED as to Plaintiffs Wiretap Act claim; and
3. Within thirty (30) days of the date of electronic filing date of this Order, Defendant shall file a response to Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint.
IT IS SO ORDERED.