From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Siratsamy v. Sacramento Cnty. Sheriffs Dep't

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 29, 2021
2:21-cv-0678-JAM-KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 29, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-cv-0678-JAM-KJN PS

07-29-2021

SOMPHOTH BOBY SIRATSAMY, Plaintiff, v. SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

(ECF No. 4)

THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

On July 8, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations (ECF No. 4), which were served on the plaintiff and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. No. objections were filed. Accordingly, 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 applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing, concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the findings and recommendations in full. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 4) are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b); and

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.


Summaries of

Siratsamy v. Sacramento Cnty. Sheriffs Dep't

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 29, 2021
2:21-cv-0678-JAM-KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 29, 2021)
Case details for

Siratsamy v. Sacramento Cnty. Sheriffs Dep't

Case Details

Full title:SOMPHOTH BOBY SIRATSAMY, Plaintiff, v. SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jul 29, 2021

Citations

2:21-cv-0678-JAM-KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 29, 2021)