From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ROW v. CA. HIGHWAY PATROL

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 4, 2006
No. CIV-S-05-1605 FCD PAN (GGH) PS (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV-S-05-1605 FCD PAN (GGH) PS.

August 4, 2006


ORDER


On June 21, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. No objections were filed.

Accordingly, the court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orland v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1999). 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 applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the Proposed Findings and Recommendations in full.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Proposed Findings and Recommendations filed June 21, 2006, are ADOPTED; and

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


Summaries of

ROW v. CA. HIGHWAY PATROL

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 4, 2006
No. CIV-S-05-1605 FCD PAN (GGH) PS (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2006)
Case details for

ROW v. CA. HIGHWAY PATROL

Case Details

Full title:MARJON ROW, Plaintiff, v. CA. HIGHWAY PATROL, Defendant

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

Date published: Aug 4, 2006

Citations

No. CIV-S-05-1605 FCD PAN (GGH) PS (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2006)