From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Howard v. Rumsfeld

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 4, 2008
No. CIV S-06-2506 MCE KJM PS (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-2506 MCE KJM PS.

January 4, 2008


ORDER


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 October 25, 2007, 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 not filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

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 October 25, 2007, are adopted in full; and

2. This action is dismissed.


Summaries of

Howard v. Rumsfeld

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 4, 2008
No. CIV S-06-2506 MCE KJM PS (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2008)
Case details for

Howard v. Rumsfeld

Case Details

Full title:MANCY HOWARD, JR., Plaintiff, v. DONALD RUMSFELD, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Jan 4, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-06-2506 MCE KJM PS (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2008)