From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mills v. Fox

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 11, 2019
No. 2:19-cv-1957 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 11, 2019)

Opinion

No. 2:19-cv-1957 JAM CKD P

12-11-2019

KENNETH WAYNE MILLS, Plaintiff, v. FOX, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 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 November 7, 2019, 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 November 7, 2019 are adopted in full; and

2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. DATED: December 11, 2019

/s/ John A. Mendez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE


Summaries of

Mills v. Fox

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 11, 2019
No. 2:19-cv-1957 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 11, 2019)
Case details for

Mills v. Fox

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH WAYNE MILLS, Plaintiff, v. FOX, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Dec 11, 2019

Citations

No. 2:19-cv-1957 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 11, 2019)